Open access peer-reviewed chapter

# Botanical Species as Traditional Therapy: A Quantitative Analisys of the Knowledge Among Ranchers in Southeastern Brazil

Written By

Maria Franco Trindade Medeiros, Luci de Senna-Valle and Regina Helena Potsch Andreata

Submitted: January 12th, 2012 Reviewed: June 4th, 2012 Published: October 17th, 2012

DOI: 10.5772/50444

From the Edited Volume

## Complementary Therapies for the Contemporary Healthcare

Edited by Marcelo Saad and Roberta de Medeiros

Chapter metrics overview

View Full Metrics

## 1. Introduction

Human communities around the world have developed health care practices based on their interaction with the components of their natural environment. Thousands of years of observation and experimentation have helped in developing different empirical medical systems that include the knowledge of plants [1-3]. Such knowledge is the subject of ethnobotany, which attempts to understand the perceptions, healing strategies, and natural resources used to fight diseases or maintain health in traditional medical systems.

Medical ethnobotany constitutes an important alternative among many other known therapies that are practiced worldwide. There is growing recognition that people in different parts of the world still use plant-based remedies as primary or complementary medicine (see, for example, [4-10]). Particularly in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, traditional medicine is part of the prevailing health care system [11]. Using plants for medicinal purposes is part of the body of traditional knowledge that is becoming increasingly more relevant to discussions on conservation biology, public health policies, and sustainable management of natural resources, biological prospection, and patents [12,13].

The present study explores the aspect of the empirical medicinal use of natural resources, including the cultural dimensions that influence the extraction of natural products. A quantitative analysis was performed based on the variables used in the study conducted with the ranchers who live in remnants of the Atlantic Forest in the State of Rio de Janeiro (Southeast, Brazil) [14, 15]. This area includes the so-called Rio das Pedras Reserve, which is situated on the Atlantic side of the Serra do Mar, in the Mangaratiba municipality. This study addressed the following questions. 1) Do people residing in preserved areas know about and/or use medicinal plants? Because these people reside in an environmental preservation area, it is expected that they use plant species therapeutically. 2) How will the triangulation of quantitative techniques be able to better assess the relative importance of plants in a culture? Considering that the wealth of knowledge/use of medicinal plants by a group of people is a complex system, it is believed that the data derived from different quantitative techniques may emphasize a plant’s importance in relation to its versatility, quantify the percentage of informants claiming the use of a certain plant for the same major medicinal purpose, and indicate how homogenous the ethnobotanical information is among the informants.

## 2. Materials and methods

### 2.1. Study area

The Rio das Pedras Reserve is located in the western region of the State of Rio de Janeiro, in the Mangaratiba municipality on the Atlantic slope of the Serra do Mar, next to the Sepetiba Bay, between the coordinates 22º59' S and 44º05' W. The reserve has an area of 1,360 hectares (13 km2). The access route to the Reserve is km 55 of the BR-101 highway (Rio/Santos), with a distance of 110 km from the city of Rio de Janeiro (Figure 1).

The area has an annual average temperature of 22ºC, an absolute maximum temperature of 38ºC, and a minimum of 12ºC. The highest rainfall index occurs in the months from December to February. The Grande River Basin is the main drainage basin; the Grande River is located in a valley with steep slopes (greater than 37º), and the elevations vary from 20 to 1,050 meters [16].

The current Reserve area corresponds to the former Goiabal Farm, an enterprise that focused on the cultivation and sale of bananas. The banana shipments were transported by boats bound for Rio de Janeiro. According to the report from the historian Alda Marília Cerqueira de Pinto (personal communication. 2000), after the death of Mr. Otacílio Cerqueira, the owner of the farm, his widow attempted to continue the operation; however, much of the banana production was diverted by the sharecroppers who sold their harvest directly. Therefore, to pay the debts acquired due to the maintenance of the farm and the lack of product requested by the banana buyers from Rio de Janeiro, the farm was sold to the French Club Méditerranée (Club Med) in 1986 for the construction of the Village Rio das Pedras at Praia Grande. Since then, the sharecroppers who planted the bananas and provided half of their production to the owner of the farm as payment for their occupation and use of the land became ranchers and have been paid indemnity to vacate the area.

As the property of Club Méditerranée, the Rio das Pedras Reserve was created in 1992 with the intention of preserving the Atlantic Forest from hunters and palm tree harvesters, in addition to providing ecological tours for its guests through the implementation of ecotourism in its trails [16]. Although Méditerranée Club intended to transform the area into a private natural history reserve, it was not officially included in this type of conservation unit. Many of the ranchers, who were sharecroppers before the implementation of the Reserve, were compensated and left the region. However, there are still nine families that reside in the Reserve, mostly since birth (91%, with 11 men and 12 women in total), and they continue planting bananas as a form of subsistence.

The ranchers from the Reserve are concentrated into two distinct areas: one where six families reside, with houses structurally made of bricks, and the other represented by three families who live in wattle and daub houses. There is no sewage system or electricity, and food is cooked using a wood stove. Water from the waterfall is transported to the houses through PVC pipes, but bathing occurs at the source of this water. The garbage produced is at times incinerated near the homes, as there is no specific location for this practice. Basic provisions, such as salt and sugar, are acquired in the supermarkets of Mangaratiba.

The banana cultivation is performed by the adults who receive R $3.00 to R$4.00 per box, comprising two to three bunches of bananas, and two of the individuals work in the Reserve, one as a guide and the other as a gardener.

### 2.2. Collection of data and botanical material

Field expeditions were conducted over one year and five months between November 1999 and August 2001 in the Rio das Pedras Reserve. During this period, the fieldwork was accomplished by visiting all of the resident ranchers in the area of the Rio das Pedras Reserve and included participant observation, the application of the free-listing technique, interviews, and guided tours. At the beginning of the study, the members of the community were informed about the purpose of the work proposed and were invited to participate in the study.

The free-listing technique helped with the initial approach of the research subject in which each collaborator was invited to list the medicinal plants for which they had knowledge/use. After this first survey, the key collaborators were intentionally selected because they were the “experts” in the use of plants with therapeutic purposes; these key collaborators had cited the largest number of plants during the free listing. A sample group composed of six collaborators, with an age range from 37 to 60 years of age, including two males and four females, was then selected.

Individual interviews were conducted to obtain greater detail about each of the plants mentioned in the free listing and with the possibility of other plants being included. Therefore, new meetings were arranged with the key collaborators for structured interviews using direct and closed questions and semi-structured interviews using open questions [18]. These events were focused on obtaining relevant information about the medicinal use of the plants.

At the end of each interview, the medicinal specimens were collected with the aid of the collaborators through a guided tour to the places where the specified plants grow. At this point, new plants could also be incorporated into the list of plants already mentioned during the interviews.

The collected botanical material was identified, herborized in accordance with the usual botanical techniques, and were deposited in the ICBA herbarium of the Santa Úrsula University (Universidade Santa Úrsula – RUSU), with duplicates in the Herbarium of the Botany Department of the National Museum (R), both located in the city of Rio de Janeiro (Brazil).

### 2.3. Data analysis

The quantitative techniques that were applied examined the importance of each use of plant species according to two principal categories: the total number of uses for each category and taxa and the informant consensus. For the total number of uses, the total number of species and the uses for each family cited by the ranchers were summed, according to a previous report [19]. The techniques included in the consensus among the informants are specified below.

The Relative Importance (RI) emphasizes a plant’s importance in relation to its versatility. It was calculated based on the number of properties attributed to a species and the number of organ systems on which this species acts, as follows [20]: RI = NCS + NP, where 2 is the maximum value obtained by a species for RI (Relative Importance); NCS = the relative number of corporal systems, calculated by dividing the number of corporal systems treated by a given species [NCSS] by the total number of corporal systems treated by the most versatile species [NCSV]; and NP = the relative number of properties, calculated by dividing the number of properties attributed to a given species [NPS] by the number of properties attributed to the most versatile species [NPSV].

The therapeutic indications cited during the interviews were grouped by body systems according to the disease categories proposed by the International Classification of Diseases [21]. By means of the consensus of the informants, the importance of a species for a determined purpose and the categories that present greater importance to the ranchers could be obtained by the calculation of the Fidelity level (FL) and from the Informant Consensus Factor (FIC), respectively [19].

The Fidelity Level (FL) is calculated by the ratio of the number of informants that claim a use of a plant species to treat a particular disease (Np) by the number of informants that use the plant as a medicine to treat any given disease (N), as expressed by the formula: FL(%) = Np/Nx100 [22].

The Informant Consensus Factor (ICF) is calculated as follows: ICF = nur - nt/nur - 1, where 1 is the maximum value of the ICF when there is a complete consensus between the informants; nur = the number of use-reports in each category; and nt = the number of taxa used [2].

## 3. Results and discussion

### 3.1. Plant resources known/used as therapy by ranchers residing in the conservation unit area

The pharmacopeia of the ranchers is composed of a list of 36 species of plants (Table 1). These species belong to 25 families of which five (Asteraceae, Lamiaceae, Araceae, Moraceae, and Rutaceae) comprise 46% of the total list (Figure 2). The Asteraceae, Lamiaceae, and Rutaceae families are among those with the greatest pharmacopeia representation in various regions of the world and include species with ample occurrence [20, 23, 24]. They also constitute important families from a cultural point of view and in relation to the chemical efficiency of their species; these are factors that, when combined, influence and determine the selection of species for medicinal purposes by the local populations [25].

A poorly differentiated overview can be observed when considering the sum of the medicinal uses for each family. A more significant ranking of families was obtained and included the following: Asteraceae, Lamiaceae, Caricaceae, Araceae, and Crassulaceae (Figure 2). From this perspective, the analysis shows that, although Caricaceae and Crassulaceae present only one cited species, these species are used for more than one medicinal purpose. These families can thus be considered more versatile with regard to the range of therapeutic applications, according to the indications from the ranchers.

Evaluating the medicinal flora in terms of the number of citations per species, the ranchers use a large number of species with only one citation (17 spp.) (Figure 3). Therefore, this fact can be an indicator that there are species with exclusive uses for certain therapeutic purposes, species that are not well known in the community, or even species that face the process of deletion from or insertion into the local pharmacopeia.

In general, the species used by the ranchers are widely used even in other regions of Brazil, as indicated by such studies as those conducted in the Amazon Basin [26], Roraima State [27] the Maranhão Lowlands [28], Acre State [29], São Paulo State [30-32], Bahia State [33], and Rio de Janeiro State [10, 34]. These data reveal that, although the ranchers geographically inhabit the Atlantic Forest biome, their knowledge/use of species for medicinal purposes was formed based on the species cultivated in their backyards (around their houses). Furthermore, these plants, which primarily occur in anthropogenic zones, are characterized by species with ample occurrence and distribution in Brazil and have also reached different parts of the world in the most differentiated biogeographic regions of the Americas, Africa, Europe, Asia, and Oceania. Among these, there are some species that are not native to the Brazilian flora yet have a wide distribution in the Brazilian territory, for example, the Menthaspecies, Citrusspecies, ArabianCoffea L., Colocasia esculenta(L.) Schott, Cymbopogon citratus(DC.) Stapf, and Matricaria chamomillaL.

However, on the issue of the use of non-native species that have wide geographic distribution in detriment to the native species of Brazil, it is believed that this choice by the ranchers may be a consequence of the involuntary displacement and resettlement process that the families face when they leave the region as the result of the area becoming a conservation unit.

Within this context, the use of species in nearby locations would be adequate due to the lower energy expended for the collection of material and also due to the monitoring of the land use in the region. According to a previous report [35], the decrease in traditional botanical knowledge is related to the distancing of human populations from areas of native vegetation, which, in a way, is similar to the reality experienced by the ranchers, given that they were no longer able to move freely around the preserved forest areas.

Another factor to be considered is the proximity of the ranchers to the urban center of the city of Mangaratiba. In this sense, a previous report [36] affirms that it would not be the proximity to the native vegetation that would interfere with the knowledge and use of medicinal plants but the social factors, such as the proximity to urban centers, which would exert a negative influence on the knowledge and utilization. According to these authors, a proximity to urban centers permits a greater offering of western, academic medicine, which competes strongly with the use of plant resources and leads to the reduction of their use by traditional communities.

 Taxon [Family] Medicinal use Np N FL Achyrocline satureioides(Lam.) DC. [Asteraceae] for toothacheduring eruption 1 1 100 Alpinia zerumbet(Pers.) Burtt & Smith [Zingiberaceae] as a sedative 1 3 33 for high blood pressure 2 3 67 Baccharis trimera(Less.) DC. [Asteraceae] for stomach ache 2 2 100 for flu 2 2 100 Bidens pilosaL. [Asteraceae] for hepatitis 2 2 100 Carica papayaL. [Caricaceae] for bronchitis 1 2 50 for flu 1 2 50 for constipation 2 2 100 for warts 2 2 100 Cecropia hololeucaMiq. [Moraceae] for bronchitis 1 1 100 Chamaesyce prostrata(Aiton) Small [Euphorbiaceae] for kidney stones 2 2 100 Chenopodium ambrosioidesL. [Chenopodiaceae] for a wound 1 5 20 Citrus aurantiumL. [Rutaceae] for flu 1 1 100 Citrus medicavar.limonumL. [Rutaceae] for cough 1 1 100 Coffea arabicaL. [Rubiaceae] for headache 1 1 100 Colocasia esculenta(L.) Schott [Araceae] for anemia 2 2 100 Costus spiralis(Jacq.) Roscoe var. spiralis[Costaceae] for kidney stones 2 2 100 Cymbopogon citratus(DC.) Stapf [Poaceae] as a sedative 2 3 67 for high blood pressure 1 3 33 for flu 1 3 33 Desmodium triflorum(L.) DC [Leguminosae] for internal inflammation 2 2 100 for external inflammation 1 2 50 Elephantopus mollisKunth. [Asteraceae] for contusion 1 1 100 Eugenia unifloraL. [Myrtaceae] for flu 4 4 100 Euterpe edulisMart. [Arecaceae] for stomach ache 1 1 100 Foeniculum vulgareL. [Apiaceae] for diarrhea 2 2 100 Gossypium hirsutumL. [Malvaceae] for internal inflammation 1 1 100 Jacaranda jasminoides(Thunb.) Sandwith [Bignoniaceae] for itchiness 1 1 100 Kalanchoe brasiliensisCambess. [Crassulaceae] for bronchitis 1 3 33 for flu 2 3 67 for a wound 2 3 67 Matricaria chamomillaL. [Asteraceae] as a sedative 1 1 100 Melissa officinalisL. [Lamiaceae] as a sedative 1 1 100 for high blood pressure 1 1 100 MenthaxpiperitaL. [Lamiaceae] for flu 1 1 100 as a dewormer 1 1 100 MenthaxvillosaHuds. [Lamiaceae] for bronchitis 1 2 50 for flu 2 2 100 as a dewormer 2 2 100 Musa paradisiacaL. [Musaceae] for wound healing 3 3 100 Piper mollicomumKunth. [Piperaceae] for back pain 2 2 100 Pistia stratiotes(L.) Schott [Araceae] as eye drops 2 2 100 Plectranthus barbatusAndr. [Lamiaceae] for the liver 2 2 100 Schinus terebinthifoliusRaddi [Anacardiaceae] as an antiseptic 1 1 100 Sechium edule(Jacq.) Sw. [Cucurbitaceae] for high blood pressure 2 2 100 Solanum capsicoidesAll. [Solanaceae] for skin boils 1 1 100 Sorocea guilleminianaGaudich. [Moraceae] for ulcers (gastritis) 1 1 100 Stachytarpheta cayennensis(Rich.) Vahl [Verbenaceae] for stomach ache 1 1 100 for toothache 1 1 100 Vernonia scorpioides(Lam.) Pers. [Asteraceae] for bronchitis 1 1 100 for flu 1 1 100 TOTAL: 25 families/36 taxa/28 therapeutic indications

### Table 1.

Relationship of the taxa and their respective fidelity level values for medicinal use according to the pharmacopeia of the ranchers of the Rio das Pedras Reserve, in the Mangaratiba municipality, Rio de Janeiro state, Brazil. Legend: Np = the number of informants that suggested the use of a species for the same purpose; N = the total number of informants that mentioned a plant for any use; FL = the fidelity level.

### 3.2. Triangulation of quantitative techniques as a tool to determine the relative importance of the plants used in traditional therapy

The medical system of the ranchers is composed of 28 therapeutic indications. The main therapeutic indications, i.e., those that constitute the greatest wealth of referred plants, are the use of plants for the flu and for bronchitis (Table 1). These medicinal applications are also among the main applications in certain previous studies [37-39].

The evaluation of the fidelity level (FL) showed that the species that obtained 100% agreement among the informants with regard to their use add up to 74%, which is equivalent to 39 reported uses for 30 species (Table 1).

Four species showed great versatility with regards to their use, with RI > 1; these plants are indicated for as many as four organ systems: Carica papayaL., Cymbopogon citratus(DC.) Stapf, Kalanchoe brasiliensisCambess., and Mentha x villosaHuds. (Table 2). The use of these species also occurs in other locations, as is shown, for example, by the study of popular medicine [40] in the municipality of Rio Claro, State of São Paulo in which the authors cited the use of the male papaya (Carica papayaL.) against cough, flu, and catarrh.

 Taxon NCSS NCS NPS NP RI Carica papaya 4 1 4 1 2 Cymbopogon citratus 3 0.75 3 0.75 1.5 Kalanchoe brasiliensis 3 0.75 3 0.75 1.5 Menthax villosa 3 0.75 3 0.75 1.5 Alpinia zerumbet 2 0.5 2 0.5 1 Baccharis trimera 2 0.5 2 0.5 1 Chenopodium ambrosioides 2 0.5 2 0.5 1 Esculenta Colocasia 2 0.5 2 0.5 1 Desmodium triflorum 2 0.5 2 0.5 1 Melissa officinalis 2 0.5 2 0.5 1 Menthax piperita 2 0.5 2 0.5 1 Stachytarpheta cayennensis 2 0.5 2 0.5 1 Vernonia scorpioides 2 0.5 2 0.5 1 Achyrocline satureioides 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Pilosa Bidens 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Cecropia hololeuca 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Chamaesyce prostrata 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Citrus aurantium 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Citrus medicatesto var. limonum 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Arabian Coffea 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Costus spiralisto var. spiralis 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Elephantopus mollis 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Uniflora Eugenia 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Euterpe edulis 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Foeniculum vulgare 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Gossypium hirsutum 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Jacaranda jasminoides 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Matricaria chamomilla 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Paradisiacal muse 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Piper mollicomum 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Pistia stratiotes 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Plectranthus barbatus 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Schinus terebinthifolius 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Sechium edule 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Solanum capsicoides 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5 Guilleminiana Sorocea 1 0.25 1 0.25 0.5

### Table 2.

Values of the relative importance of each taxon used as medicine by the ranchers of the Rio das Pedras Reserve, Mangaratiba municipality, State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Legend: NCSS= the number of corporal systems treated by a given species; NCS = the relative number of corporal systems; NPS = the number of properties attributed to a given species; NP = the relative number of properties; RI = the relative importance.

The organ systems that these plants act upon were observed by analyzing the contribution of plant species with regard to the functionality of the pharmacopeia of the ranchers. The medicinal species treat diseases grouped into eleven organ systems. Among these systems, six are the main systems with regard to the number of species cited: respiratory system disorders, infectious and parasitic diseases, digestive system disorders, skin and subcutaneous tissues diseases, nervous system disorders, and circulatory system disorders (Table 3). In a study conducted in the municipality of Barra do Piraí, Rio de Janeiro State, reference is made to plants used in rituals, for flu symptoms, and skin and healing problems as the most representative therapeutic indications in terms of the number of species [41]. In a study conducted in Santa Maria, Rio Grande Do Sul State, the flu, digestive problems, and anti-inflammatory uses are the most common indications [42]. In the semiarid region in Northeastern Brazil, a significant number of plants are also used to treat health problems, including circulatory, digestive, and respiratory disorders of organ systems [43-45]. Given that a larger number of species are used for the treatment of flu, bronchitis, skin diseases, and digestive system conditions, there is agreement between the present work and those by the above-mentioned authors.

According to the Informant Consensus Factor (ICF) in terms of the medicinal potential of the species cited by the ranchers of the Rio das Pedras Reserve, the organ system with the most consensus was related to respiratory system disorders (Table 3). Therefore, the results of the ICF point to this medicinal category as the one that the informants are the most confident about. All of the other categories obtained the minimum values expected, as the number of species was equivalent to the uses. In a previous study [44] in which the same index was calculated, respiratory diseases are also among the main disease categories.

 Organ system nt nur ICF Respiratory system disorders 11 15 0.29 Certain infectious and parasitic diseases 8 8 0 Diseases of the blood and hematopoietic organs 1 1 0 Nervous system disorders 5 5 0 Sensory system disorders [eyes] 1 1 0 Circulatory system disorders 4 4 0 Digestive system disorders 7 7 0 Skin and subcutaneous tissue diseases 7 7 0 Osteomuscular and connective tissue diseases 1 1 0 Genitourinary disorders 2 2 0 Injuries, poisoning, and other consequences of external causes 3 3 0

### Table 3.

Consensus for the therapeutic use of plant species among the ranchers of the Rio das Pedras Reserve, Mangaratiba municipality, Rio de Janeiro state, Brazil. Legend: nur = the sum of uses recorded by each informant for a category; nt = the number of species indicated in the category; ICF = the informant consensus factor.

## 4. Conclusion

The ranchers have a knowledge of plant resources that point to a wealth of species that are mostly considered to be non-native to the biome in which they were found: the Atlantic Forest. These plants are generally collected in backyards, which can reinforce the importance of the environment upon the selection criteria of the species in a pharmacopeia. Moreover, when analyzing the list that compiles the pharmacopeia of the ranchers, another factor to be considered is the cultural influences that, throughout the history of this people, many have contributed to the adaptation of their pharmacopeia to the conditions in which they now live, after the creation of the conservation unit.

Considering the triangulation of quantitative techniques, it is important to emphasize that these analyses do not substitute for the careful qualitative analysis conducted with the ranchers from the Rio das Pedras Reserve, but they helped to demonstrate that Carica papayaL. is a species with the most effective pharmacological potential because it reached the maximum value for relative importance. With regard to the fidelity level, a large part of the indicated uses for each species achieved the maximum expected value.

The plants used by the ranchers that are included in the respiratory disease category, which is the category that obtained the greatest consensus with regard to use among the informants, are the species that deserves a proper pharmacological study. The following species fit into this category are: Baccharis trimera(Less.) DC., Carica papayaL., Cecropia hololeucaMiq., Citrus aurantiumL., Citrus medicavar. limonumL., Cymbopogon citratus(DC.) Stapft, Eugenia unifloraL., Kalanchoe brasiliensisCambess., Menthax piperitaL., Menthax villosaHuds., and Vernonia scorpioides(Lam.) Pers..

Finally, because of the value that such information held by the local populations about the plant kingdom represents for humanity, it is suggested that the application of quantitative indices will contribute to a deeper analysis and identification of new inferences in ethnobotany. This research highlights the importance of local perceptions and knowledge as potential information that can contribute to future applications and, therefore, as a new source of medicines from natural products.

## Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank the ranchers for their valuable participation in the research and the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (Conselho Nacional de Desevolvimento Cientifico e Tecnológico-CNPq) for the research productivity scholarship awarded to Regina Helena Potsch Andreata.

## References

1. 1. ArvigoR.BalickM.1998Rainforest Remedies: One Hundred Healing Herbs of Belize. 2nd ed. Twin Lakes, US: Lotus Press.219
2. 2. HeinrichM.AnkliA.FreiB.WeimannC.SticherO.1998Medicinal Plants in Mexico: Healers’ Consensus and Cultural Importance. Social science & medicine471118591871
3. 3. Halberstein RA2005Medicinal Plants: Historical and Cross-cultural Usage Patterns. Annals of epidemiology159686699
4. 4. AgeletA. .VallèsJ.2001Studies on Pharmaceutical Ethnobotany in the Region of Pallars (Pyrenees, Catalonia, Iberian Peninsula). Part I. General Results and New or Very Rare Medicinal Plants. Journal of ethnopharmacology775770
5. 5. Camejo-RodriguesJ.AscensãoL.BonetM. À.VallèsJ.2003An Ethnobotanical Study of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants in the Natural Park of “Serra de São Mamede” (Portugal). Journal of ethnopharmacology89199209
6. 6. Ngoula MJ2003The Status of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants in Central and Southern Africa. In: ICS-UNIDO. Medicinal Plants and their Utilization.111118
7. 7. AkerretaS.CaveroR. Y.CalvoM. I.2007First Comprehensive Contribution to Medical Ethnobotany of Western Pyrenees. Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine 3: 26.
8. 8. RigatM.MABonetGarcia. S.GarnatjeT.VallèsJ. J.2007Studies on Pharmaceutical Ethnobotany in the High River Ter Valley (Pyrenees, Catalonia, Iberian Peninsula). Journal of ethnopharmacology113267277
9. 9. ParadaM.CarrióE.MABonetVallèsJ.2009Ethnobotany of the Alt Empordà Region (Catalonia, Iberian Peninsula)- Plants Used in Human Traditional Medicine. Journal of ethnopharmacology124609618
10. 10. BritoM. R.Senna-ValleL.2011Plantas Medicinais Utilizadas na Comunidade Caiçara da Praia do Sono, Paraty, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil [Medicinal Plants Used in the Caiçara Community of Praia do Sono, Paraty, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil]. Acta botanica brasilica25363372
11. 11. World Health Organization (WHO)2002Traditional Medicine Strategy20022005
12. 12. MedeirosM. F. T.Senna-ValleL.AndreataR. H. P.FernandesL. R. R. M. V.2007Informações Estratégicas Geradas através do Estudo de Patentes de Plantas Medicinais citadas pelos Sitiantes da Reserva Rio das Pedras, Mangaratiba RJ [Strategic Information Generated through the study of Medicinal Plant Patents cited by the Ranchers of the Rio das Pedras Reserve, Mangaratiba RJ]. Neotropical Biology Journal (Revista de biologia neotropical)4139147
13. 13. BoscoloO. H.Senna-ValleL.2010An Ethnobotanical Survey as Subsidy for the Generation of Researches Related to Biotechnology. International journal of biotechnology11001006
14. 14. Medeiros MFT & Andreata RHP2003Cartilha sobre as Planas Medicinais Utilizadas pelos Sitiantes da Reserva Particular do Patrimônio Natural Rio das Pedras, Mangaratiba, RJ [Guidebook about Medicinal Plants used by the ranchers of the Rio das Pedras Natural Heritage private reserve, Mangaratiba, RJ]. In: Siqueira JC de, coordinator. Mangaratiba: Educação Ambiental- Resgate de Valores Socioambientais.. Rio de Janeiro: PUC-Rio; Petrobrás.4966
15. 15. Medeiros MFT, Fonseca VS, & Andreata RHP2004Plantas Medicinais e seus Usos pelos Sitiantes da Reserva Rio das Pedras, Mangaratiba, RJ, Brasil [Medicinal plants and their uses by the ranchers of the Rio das Pedras Reserve, Mangaratiba, RJ, Brazil]. Acta botanica brasilica182391399
16. 16. SouzaR.de1997Ecoturismo em Unidade de Conservação: Estudo de Caso da Reserva Rio das Pedras, Mangaratiba, Rio de Janeiro [Ecotourism in Conservation Units: Case Study of the Rio das Pedras Reserve, Mangaratiba, Rio de Janeiro]. Masters Thesis. Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro.
17. 17. Agrofoto Aerofotografia S/A.1999Levantamento Planialtimétrico da RPPN-Reserva Rio das Pedras, km 445,5 da BR-101 (Rio-Santos). Escala 1:10.000, Município de Mangaratiba, estado do Rio de Janeiro [Planialtimetric survey of RPPN-Rio das Pedras Reserve, km 445.5 of BR-101 (Rio-Santos). 1:10.000 scale, Mangaratiba municipality, state of Rio de Janeiro].
18. 18. Alexiades MN1996Collecting Ethnobotanical Data: An Introduction to Basic Concepts and Techniques. In: Alexiades, MN, editor. Selected Guidelines for Ethnobotanical Research: A Field Manual. New York: Advances in economic botany.105494
19. 19. Phillips OL1996Some Quantitative Methods for Analyzing Ethnobotanical Knowledge. In: Alexiades MN, editor. Selected Guidelines for Ethnobotanical Research: A Field Manual. New York: Advances in Economic Botany.10171197
20. 20. Bennett BC & Prance GT2000Introduced Plants in the Indigenous Pharmacopoeia of Northern South America. Economic botany54190102
21. 21. World Health Organization (WHO)2006International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. 10th Revision.
22. 22. FriedmanJ.YanivZ.DafniA.PalewithD.1986A Preliminary Classification of the Healing Potencial of Medicinal Plants, Based on a Rational Analysis of an Ethnopharmacological Field Survey among Bedouins in the Negev Desert, Israel. Journal of ethnopharmacology16275287
23. 23. RiosM.1993Plantas Utiles en el Noroccidente de Pichincha- Etnobotánica del Caserío Alvaro Pérez Intriago y la Reserva Forestal ENDESA. Quito: Hombre y Ambiente, número monográfico 26 [Useful Plants in Northwestern Pichincha- Ethnobotany of Caserío Alvaro Pérez Intriago and the ENDESA Forest Reserve. Quito: Man and Environment, monograph26p.
24. 24. Albuquerque UP2001The Use of Medicinal Plants by the Cultural Descendants of African People in Brazil. Acta farm. bonaerense202139144
25. 25. HeinrichM.2008Ethnopharmacy and Natural Product Research- Multidisciplinary Opportunities for Research in the Metabolomic Age. Phytochemistry Letters1115
26. 26. AmorozoM. C. M.GelyA.1988Uso de Plantas Medicinais por Caboclos do Baixo Amazonas, Barcarena, PA, Brasil [Use of Medicinal Plants by the Caboclos of the lower Amazonas, Barcarena, PA, Brazil]. Boletim do museu paraense emílio goeldi sér. bot.4147131
27. 27. Berg ME & Silva MHL1988Contribuição ao Conhecimento da Flora Medicinal de Roraima [Contribution to the knowledge of the Medicinal Flora of Roraima]. Acta amazônica 18(1-2): 23-35.
28. 28. Rêgo TJAS1988Levantamento de Plantas Medicinais na Baixada Maranhense [Survey of Medicinal plants in the lowlands of Maranhão]. Acta amazônica 18(1-2): 75-88.
29. 29. Ming LC1995Levantamento de Plantas Medicinais na Reserva Extrativista “Chico Mendes”- Acre [Survey of Medicinal Plants in the Extractive Reserve “Chico Mendes”- Acre]. Doctoral Dissertation. Biosciences Institute, São Paulo State University (Universidade Estadual Paulista) “Júlio de Mesquita Filho”, Botucatu.
30. 30. BegossiA.Leitão-FilhoH. F.RichersonP. J.1993Plant Uses in a Brazilian Fishing Community (Búzios Island). Journal of ethnobiology13233256
31. 31. BegossiA.FigueiredoG. M.Leitão-FilhoH. F.1997Ethnobotany of Atlantic Forest Coastal Communities: II. Diversity of Plant Uses at Sepetiba Bay (SE Brazil). Human ecology252353361
32. 32. BegossiA.HanazakiN.TamashiroJ. Y.Leitão-FilhoH. F.2000Diversity of Plant Uses in two Caiçara Communities from the Atlantic Forest Coast, Brazil. Biodiversity and conservation9597615
33. 33. Costa-Neto EM, Oliveira MVM2000The use of Medicinal Plants in the County of Tanquinho, State of Bahia, Northeastern Brazil. Revista brasileira de plantas medicinais2216
34. 34. BoscoloO. H.Senna-ValleL.2008Medicinal Use Plants in Quissamã, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. Iheringia. Botanical Series63263278
35. 35. Case RJ, Pauli GF, Soejarto DD2005Factors in Maintaining Indigenous Knowledge among Ethnic Communities of Manus Island. Economic botany59356365
36. 36. VandebroekI.CalewaertJ. B.De JonckheereStjin.et al.2004Use of Medicinal Plants and Pharmaceuticals by Indigenous Communities in the Bolivian Andes and Amazon. Bulletin of the World Health Organization82243250
37. 37. Albuquerque UP, Oliveira RF2007Is the Use-impact on Native Caatinga Species in Brazil Reduced by the High Species Richness of Medicinal Plants? Journal of ethnopharmacology113156170
38. 38. Barbosa JAA2011From Seeds to Fruit: Therapeutic Indications of Vegetables and their Parents in a Traditional Community from the Paraíba. Journal of biology and pharmacy54863
39. 39. Castro JÁ, Brasileiro BP, Lyra DH, Pereira DA, Chaves JL, Amaral CLF2011Ethnobotanical Study of Traditional Uses of Medicinal Plants: The Flora of Caatinga in the Community of Cravolândia, BA, Brazil. Journal of medicinal plants research519051917
40. 40. Silva-Almeida MF, Amorozo MCM1998Popular Medicine in the Ferraz District, Rio Claro municipality, State of São Paulo. Brazilian journal of ecology213646
41. 41. Parente CET, Rosa MMT2001Commercialized plants as medicines in the municipality of Barra do Piraí, RJ. Rodriguésia114759
42. 42. SomavillaN.Canto-DorowT. S.1996Survey of Medicinal Plants used in the Neighborhoods of Santa Maria, RS, Brasil. Science and Nature1831148
43. 43. Albuquerque UP, Andrade LHC2002Traditional Botanical Knowledge and Conservation in an area of the Caatinga. Acta botanica brasilica16273285
44. 44. Almeida CFCBR, Albuquerque UP2002Use and conservation of medicinal plants and animals in the state of Pernambuco (North east of Brasil): a case study. Interciência276276285
45. 45. Cartaxo SL, Souza MMA, Albuquerque UP2010Medicinal Plants with Bioprospecting Potential Used in Semi-arid Northeastern Brazil. Journal of ethnopharmacology131326342

Written By

Maria Franco Trindade Medeiros, Luci de Senna-Valle and Regina Helena Potsch Andreata

Submitted: January 12th, 2012 Reviewed: June 4th, 2012 Published: October 17th, 2012