Comparison of Herbarium Label Data and Published Medicinal Use: Herbaria as an Underutilized Source of Ethnobotanical Information

Abstract

The use of herbarium specimens as vouchers to support ethnobotanical surveys is well established. However, herbaria may be underutilized resources for ethnobotanical research that depends on the analysis of large datasets compiled across multiple sites. Here, we compare two medicinal use datasets, one sourced from published papers and the other from online herbaria to determine whether herbarium and published data are comparable and to what extent herbarium specimens add new data and fill gaps in our knowledge of geographical extent of plant use. Using Brazilian legumes as a case study, we compiled 1400 use reports from 105 publications and 15 Brazilian herbaria. Of the 319 species in 107 genera with cited medicinal uses, 165 (51%) were recorded only in the literature and 55 (17%) only on herbarium labels. Mode of application, plant part used, or therapeutic use was less often documented by herbarium specimen labels (17% with information) than publications (70%). However, medicinal use of 21 of the 128 species known from only one report in the literature was substantiated from independently collected herbarium specimens, and 58 new therapeutic applications, 25 new plant parts, and 16 new modes of application were added for species known from the literature. Thus, when literature reports are few or information-poor, herbarium data can both validate and augment these reports. Herbarium data can also provide insights into the history and geographical extent of use that are not captured in publications.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12231-017-9367-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Indigenous Knowledge of New Guinea’s Useful Plants: A Review1

“…While references contained more use reports than herbarium specimens (30,679 vs. 885), herbarium specimens added 159 species and new localities that were found in references (Fig. 1), illustrating that herbaria are important ethnobotanical repositories (Souza and Hawkins 2017).…”

Comparative phylogenetic methods and the cultural evolution of medicinal plant use

“…Efforts are being made to set methodological guidelines and data standards, increasing the quality ethnobotanical and ethnomedicinal data collection and providing quality criteria for the selection of literature [60,101]. Meanwhile, for some applications where whole ethnopharmacopoeias are considered, it might be appropriate to use large data sets compiled using data from herbarium vouchers to complement the ethnobotanical literature [102].…”

Which Plants Used in Ethnomedicine Are Characterized? Phylogenetic Patterns in Traditional Use Related to Research Effort

“…In Brazil, the Leguminosae comprises c. 2,800 species in more than 200 genera ( Flora of Brazil 2020 in Construction, 2016 ). The species diversity, widespread distribution, and many reported uses ( Souza and Hawkins, 2017 ), and the availability of phylogenetic information ( Legume Phylogeny Working Group [LPWG], 2013 ) have prompted us to select the family as a case study. We focus on Brazil since its vast biodiversity is a potential source of new medicines as well as a source of primary health care: it is estimated that 66% of the population has no access to commercial drugs ( Mazzari and Prieto, 2014 ).…”