Sociodemographic differences in the cultural significance of edible and toxic mushrooms among Tsotsil towns in the Highlands of Chiapas, Mexico

Abstract

BackgroundMushrooms are important forest resources, mostly as food, despite the serious health threat posed by toxic species. In the Highlands of Chiapas, numerous wild mushroom intoxications have been registered. While Chiapas has been vastly studied from an ethnomycological perspective, no certainty exists as to how nomenclature systems differentiate edible and toxic species, which species are most culturally significant, and whether sociodemographic factors relate to how well-known they are in the Highlands of Chiapas. This paper evaluates which are the most culturally significant edible and toxic wild mushroom species in seven Tsotsil communities from this region and whether differences exist in their knowledge relating to different sociodemographic subsets (gender, schooling, and occupation). The hypothesis that there is a difference in the number of species that people mention, as well as the number of times each ethno-taxon is mentioned, between people from different social groups was tested.MethodsWith consent, 133 Tsotsil people from seven communities were interviewed. Interviews focused on local systematics and free listings of edible and toxic mushrooms. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were performed, including multivariate methods and non-parametric statistics.ResultsTwenty-five edible and 15 toxic taxa were mentioned. Some directly correspond to Linneanean species, while others are subdifferentiated or supradifferentiated. Only 62% of the interviewees named toxic mushrooms. The most frequently mentioned edible taxa were Amanita hayalyuy and A. jacksoniii, Agaricus spp., and Armillaria mellea. The most frequently mentioned toxic species were Amanita muscaria, Suillellus luridus, and Russula emetica. Significant differences in the number of mentioned edible ethnotaxa were found only among different occupations and schooling. The models including schooling interacting with either gender or occupation are better supported. Significant differences in the number of times toxic ethnotaxa are mentioned were found only between men and women.ConclusionsThe Tsotsil region of the Highlands of Chiapas is where the most average mushroom species are recognized state-wide. Schooling and occupation seem most determinant for people to know more or less species of mushrooms, while gender appears irrelevant. People with no studies and field-related occupations name more species. Identification criteria to distinguish edible from toxic species seem to rest not on detailed recognition of the second set but precise knowledge of the first.

Extreme levels of mycophilia documented in Mazovia, a region of Poland

“…The majority of regional ethnomycological studies have focused only on fungi species used for consumption. Examples include works from Mexico, such as the study conducted in two municipalities of the Sierra Tarahumara, with 22 recognized edible folk taxa [51]; in Tsotsil town in the Highland of Chiapas with 25 edible taxa [52]; or in Amelaco, Quéretaro, where the authors were able to list 33 taxa [53]. The number of species sold in local markets in Mexico is much higher.…”

Breaking the paradigms of residual categories and neglectable importance of non-used resources; the "vital" traditional knowledge of non-edible mushrooms and their substantive cultural significance

“…Our data showed that non-edible fungi species are key factors in the kosmos, corpus, and praxis of traditional knowledge of wild mushrooms [5]. We identi ed more than 100 non-edible taxa; in contrast, other ethnomycological studies usually mention up to 17 species that are recognized as toxic or poisonous [13,41]. Moreover, the characterization of local knowledge on non-edible mushrooms has been super cial and is generally the result generalizations from edible mushrooms [11,16,19,75].…”

“…The names emerge by contrasting non-edible with edible mushrooms, and each ethnotaxon is delimited by certain types of characteristics that allow for its recognition. In this nomenclatural scheme we observed that only the most remarkable species, or the ones that represent health hazards, have a name, but as their relevance declines, so does the interest to assign them names [9,11,13,30,41]. In addition, the names demonstrate the pragmatic character of the nomenclature, where a vast knowledge of morphologic, ecologic, phenologic and qualitative traits is employed to allow the recognition of every ethnotaxon [8].…”

“…The fact that people considered as poisonous all mushrooms that they do not include in their diet indicates that knowledge and interest depends on traditions of consumption [15,17,19,30,40,41]. There are only a few cases where a species that has not been used within the family nucleus has been integrated in the diet, showing a degree of rejection of the unknown, due to intoxication risks [77].…”

“…Studies conducted in different parts of the world report that non-edible mushrooms are identi ed in general terms, without speci c names, and only classi ed as non-edible [13][14][15]20,41]. Scarce studies report one or two local names to refer to non-edible ethnotaxa [2,11,26,30,32].…”