Conservation priorities of useful plants from different techniques of collection and analysis of ethnobotanical data

This study analyzes three methods of data analysis to verify which one would be more appropriate to get information aiming the conservation, selecting the use value (VU) inventory in situ and conservation property index (IPC). It was developed in in Northeast Brazil, via interviewed householders (46 informants). The VU was calculated considering only the effective use of plants; the inventory in situ was made through the frequency of species occurrence in homes; and the IPC combining ethnobotanical and phytossociological data. It was observed a similar cast of the indicated species by VU and inventory in situ, being different from the IPC cast. As this study sought to analyze the best technique for species identification which were needing conservationist actions, and obtained different results among the chosen methods. It has been suggested the use of methods that unite in their analysis both ethnobotanical and ecological aspects, like in the plants list from the priority index of conservation, which demonstrated to be more efficient to identify rare species in the local vegetation. The VU and the inventory in situ are more efficient to identify the most known and used species in the communities, however without analyzing these plants in the local vegetation

Local ecological knowledge and its relationship with biodiversity conservation among two Quilombola groups living in the Atlantic Rainforest, Brazil

Information on the knowledge, uses, and abundance of natural resources in local communities can provide insight on conservation status and conservation strategies in these locations. The aim of this research was to evaluate the uses, knowledge and conservation status of plants in two Quilombolas (descendants of slaves of African origin) communities in the Atlantic rainforest of Brazil, São Sebastião da Boa Vista (SSBV) and São Bento (SB). We used a combination of ethnobotanical and ecological survey methods to ask: 1) What ethnobotanical knowledge do the communities hold? 2) What native species are most valuable to them? 3) What is the conservation status of the native species used? Thirteen local experts described the names and uses of 212 species in SSBV (105 native species) and 221 in SB (96 native species). Shannon Wiener diversity and Pielou's Equitability indices of ethnobotanical knowledge of species were very high (5.27/0.96 and 5.28/0.96, respectively). Species with the highest cultural significance and use-value indexes in SSBV were Dalbergia hortensis (26/2.14), Eremanthus erythropappus (6.88/1), and Tibouchina granulosa (6.02/1); while Piptadenia gonoacantha (3.32/1), Sparattosperma leucanthum (3.32/1) and Cecropia glaziovii (3.32/0.67) were the highest in SB. Thirty-three native species ranked in the highest conservation priority category at SSBV and 31 at SB. D. hortensis was noteworthy because of its extremely high cultural importance at SSBV, and its categorization as a conservation priority in both communities. This information can be used towards generating sustainable use and conservation plans that are appropriate for the local communities