Background
The growing interest for more natural products in food and health industries has led to increasing research on traditional knowledge related to plants. While theoretical knowledge (TK) on the uses of a species informs on the wide spectrum of potential uses of that species, actual uses (AU) highlight their potential being actually used. Distinguishing between the two is important when reporting ethnobotanical studies. However, studies often equated AU and TK, sometimes misleading conclusions, and decision-making. This study assessed TK, AU, and difference between TK and AU of Annona senegalensis and how each is related to factors such as age, sex, sociolinguistic group, and main activity in Benin republic.
Methods
Data were collected through semi-structured individual interviews (n = 755) and analyzed using among others, relative frequency of citation (RFC), and use-value (UV).
Results
A total of 168 theoretical uses were recorded but only 92 were “actually” practiced, of which four were food and 88 medicinal uses. TK and AU were positively correlated. As expected, TK was also significantly higher than AU, indicating that some potential uses of the species are still not valued. Sociolinguistic group and main activity, not age and sex, were the main factors influencing TK, AU, and difference between TK and AU. The highest TK was found with Bariba sociolinguistic group and the highest AU with Otamari. Fruits (100%) and flowers (10%) were the most used organs for food, while leaves (40%) and roots (7%) were mostly used for medicinal purposes. The most common food uses were consumption of the ripe fruits (100%), and food seasoning with flowers (10%). The most cited diseases were malaria (28%) and intestinal worms (8%).
Conclusions
The study illustrated the importance of differentiating between TK and AU. It documented the wide range of the uses of A. senegalensis, while highlighting its most common uses, and the need to better valorize and sustainably manage the species.