Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
Published in: Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Research

Use of mammals in a semi-arid region of Brazil: an approach to the use value and data analysis for conservation

Authors: Suellen da Silva Santos, Reinaldo Farias Paiva de Lucena, Hyago Keslley de Lucena Soares, Vanessa Moura dos Santos Soares, Natalice Santos Sales, Lívia Emanuelle Tavares Mendonça

Published in: Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

This study aimed to survey the knowledge and use of mammals by the residents of the rural community of Capivara in the municipality of Solânea (Paraíba State, Northeast Brazil) and to propose a new method of using the use value as a tool for data analysis in ethnozoological surveys.

Methods

The uses attributed to mammals were recorded through semi-structured interviews conducted with the breadwinners (men and women) living in the community. The species were identified through guided tours, by descriptions made by the interviewees, and using specimens donated by them, as well as by comparison with the pertinent scientific literature (morphological and ecological). Through the use value differentiated analysis, it was possible to distinguish the current use value of the species (effective use) from their potential use value (knowledge, but no effective use) to determine their real importance related to the uses cited by the studied group.

Results

Nineteen species were cited; however, only 17 of them were identified and then distributed in 13 families. The other species were identified at the genus level Leopardus sp. and order Rodentia. The species were classified into 6 categories of use: food, captive breeding, zootherapeutic, artisanal, magic/religious, and veterinary purposes.

Conclusions

This article discusses possible conservation solutions, given the irregular exploitation of some species, warning about the biodiversity, and traditional knowledge conservation.
Literature
1.
Paglia AP, Fonseca GAB, Rylands AB, Herrmann G, Aguiar LMS, Chiarello AG, Leite YLR, Costa LP, Siciliano S, Kierulff MCM, Mendes SL, Tavares VC, Mittermeier RA, Patton JL. Lista Anotada dos Mamíferos do Brasil / Annotated checklist of Brazilian mammals. 2ª Edição / 2nd Edition. Occasional Papers in Conservation Biology. 2012, 6, 76 pp.
2.
Albuquerque UP, Araújo EL, El-deir ACA, Lima ALA, Souto A, Bezerra BM, Ferraz EMN, Freire EMX, Sampaio EVS, Las-casas FMG, Moura GJB, Pereira GA, Melo JG, Ramos MA, Rodal MJN, Schiel N, Lyra-Neves RM, Alves RRN, Azevedo-Júnior SM, Telino-Júnior WR, Severi W. Caatinga revisited: ecology and conservation of an important seasonal dry forest. Scientific World Journal. 2012:1–18.
3.
Mares MA, Wiilig MR, Lacher-Jr TE. The Brazilian Caatinga in South American zoogeographic: tropical mammals in a dry region. J Biogeograph. 1985;12:57–69.CrossRef
4.
Mares MA, Wiilig MR, Streilein KE, Lacher-Jr TE. The mammal of northeastern Brazil: a preliminary assessment. Annals Carnegie Museum. 1981;50(4):81–100.
5.
Oliveira JA. Diversidade de mamíferos e o estabelecimento de áreas prioritárias para a conservação do bioma Caatinga. In: Silva JMC, Tabarelli M, Fonseca MT, Lins LV. (Orgs.). Biodiversidade da Caatinga: áreas e ações prioritárias para a conservação. Ministério Do Meio Ambiente/Universidade Federal De Pernambuco. 2004, 264-282.
6.
Monteiro MAOC, Borges-Nojosa DM, Langguth AR, Sousa MAN, Silva LAM, Leite LMRM, Prado FMV, Veríssimo KCS, Moraes BLC. In: Araújo FS, Rodal MJN, Barbosa MRV. (Eds). Análise das variações da biodiversidade do bioma Caatinga, suporte e estratégias regionais de conservação. Biodiversidade 12. Ministério Do Meio Ambiente. 2005,16-33.
7.
Wilson EOA. Situação atual da diversidade biológica. In: Biodiversidade. Rio De Janeiro: Nova Fronteira; 1997.
8.
Willig MR. Bat community structure in South America: a tenacious chimera. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural. 1986;59:151–68.
9.
Feijó JA, Langguth A. Mamíferos de médio e grande porte do Nordeste do Brasil: distribuição e taxonomia, com descrição de novas espécies. Revista Nordestina de Biologia. 2013;22(1):3–225.
10.
Melo RS, Silva OC, Souto A, Alves RRN, Schiel N. The role of mammals in local communities living in conservation areas in the Northeast of Brazil: An ethnozoological approach. Tropical Conservation Science. 2014;7(3):423–39.CrossRef
11.
Souza JB, Alves RRN. Hunting and wildlife use in an Atlantic Forest remnant of northeastern Brazil. Trop Conserv Sci. 2014;7(1):145–60.CrossRef
12.
Santos SS, Soares HKL, Soares VMS, Lucena RFP. Conhecimento tradicional e utilização da fauna silvestre em São José da Lagoa Tapada, Paraíba, Brasil. Revista Etnobiología. 2019;17(1):31–48.
13.
Barbosa JEA, Aguiar JO, Alves RRN. Medicinal use of animals by hunters in North Easters Brazil. Indian J Tradit Knowl. 2018;17(3):485–93.
14.
Léo-Neto NA, Alves RRN. A Natureza Sagrada do Candomblé: Análise da construção mística acerca da natureza em terreiros de Candomblé em Caruaru (PE) e Campina Grande (PB). Interciência. 2010;35:568–74.
15.
Mendonça LET, Souto CM, Andrelino LL, Souto WMS, Vieira WLS, Alves RRN. Conflitos entre pessoas e animais silvestres no Semiárido paraibano e suas implicações para conservação. Sitientibus série Ciências Biológicas. 2011;11(2):185–99.CrossRef
16.
Alves RRN, Mendonça LET, Confessor MVA, Vieira WLS, Lopez LCS. Hunting strategies used in the semi-arid region of northeastern Brazil. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2009;5(12):1–56.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
17.
Alves RRN, Oliveira MDGG, Barboza RRD, Lopez LCS. An ethnozoological survey of medicinal animals commercialized in the markets of Campina Grande, NE Brazil. Human Ecology Review. 2010;17:11–7.
18.
Alves RRN, Rosa IL, Léo Neto NA, Voeks R. Animals for the gods: magical and religious faunal use and trade in Brazil. Human Ecology. 2012a;40:751–80.CrossRef
19.
Barbosa JAA, Aguiar JO. Conhecimentos e usos da fauna por caçadores no semiárido brasileiro: um estudo de caso no estado da Paraíba, Nordeste do Brasil. Biotemas. 2015;28(2):137–48.CrossRef
20.
Chiarello AG, Aguiar LMS, Cerqueira R., Melo FR, Rodrigues FHG, Silva VMF. Mamíferos. In: Ministério do Meio Ambiente: Livro Vermelho da Fauna Brasileira Ameaçada de Extinção. Brasília 2008. Ministério do Meio Ambiente.
21.
Robinson JG, Redford KH. Sustainable harvest of neotropical forest mammals. In: Neotropical Wildlife Use And Conservation (ed.) Robinson, J.G. e Redford, K.H. Chicago, Il, USA: University Of Chicago Press; 1991. p. 415–29.
22.
Willig MR, Mares MA. Mammals from the Caatinga: an updated list and summary of recent research. Revista Brasileira de Biologia. 1989;49(2):361–7.PubMed
23.
Collar N, Wege DC, Long AJ. Patterns and causes of endangerment in the new world avifauna. Ornithol Monogr. 1997;48:237–60.CrossRef
24.
Alves RRN. Relationships between fauna and people and the role of ethnozoology in animal conservation. Ethnobiology Conserv. 2012;1:1–69.
25.
26.
Phillips O, Gentry AH. The useful plants of Tambopata, Peru: I. Statistical hypotheses test with new quantitative technique. Econ Bot. 1993;47(1):15–32.CrossRef
27.
Phillips O, Gentry AH. The useful plants of Tambopata, Peru: II. Additional hypothesis testing in quantitative ethnobotany. Economic Botany. 1993a;47(1):33–43.CrossRef
28.
Rossato SC, Leitão-Filho HF, Begossi A. Ethnobotany of Caiçaras of the Atlantic Forest Coast (Brazil). Econ Bot. 1999;53:387–95.CrossRef
29.
La Torre-Cuadros MA, Islebe EGA. Traditional ecological knowledge and use of vegetation in southeastern México: a case study from Solferino, Quintana Roo. Biodivers Conserv. 2003;12:2455–76.CrossRef
30.
Lucena RFP, Albuquerque UP, Araújo EL. Does the use-value of woody plants of the Caatinga (northeastern Brazil) explain their local availability? Econ Bot. 2007;61(4):347–61.CrossRef
31.
Lucena RFP, Albuquerque UP, Monteiro JM, Almeida CFCBR, Florentino ATN, Ferraz JSF. Useful plants of the semi-arid northeastern region of Brazil – a look at their conservation and sustainable use. Environ Monit Assess. 2007a;125:281–190.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Molares S, Ladio A. Ethnobotanical review of the Mapuche medicinal flora: use patterns on a regional scale. J Ethnopharmacology. 2009;122:251–60.CrossRef
33.
Bezerra DMMSQ, Araujo HFP, Alves RRN. The use of wild birds by rural communities in the semi-arid region of Rio Grande do Norte state, Brazil. Bioremediation, Biodiversity and Bioavailability. 2011, 5 (Special Issue 1): 117-120.
34.
Souto WMS, Mourão JS, Barboza RRD, Mendonça LET, Lucena RFP, Confessor MVA, Vieiras WLS, Montenegro PFGP, Lopez LCS, Alves RRN. Medicinal animals used in ethnoveterinary practices of the ‘Cariri Paraibano’, NE Brazil. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2011;7:30.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
35.
Alves RRN, Melo MF, Ferreira FS, Trovão DMBM, Dias TLP, Oliveira JV, Lucena RFP, Barboza RRDB. Healing with animals in a semiarid northeastern area of Brazil. Environ Dev Sustain. 2016;18:1733–47.CrossRef
36.
Bonifácio KM, Freire EMX, Schiavetti A. Cultural keystone species of fauna as a method for assessing conservation priorities in a protected area of the Brazilian semiarid. Biota Neotropica. 2016, 16(2).
37.
Silva N, Lucena RFP, Lima JRF, Lima GDS, Carvalho TKN, Sousa Júnior SP, Alves CAB. Conhecimento e uso da vegetação nativa da Caatinga em uma comunidade rural da Paraíba, Nordeste do Brasil. Bol Mus Biol Mello Leitão. 2014;34:5–37.
38.
Stebbins RA. Fitting in: the researcher as learner and participant. Qual Quant. 1987;21(1):103–8.CrossRef
39.
Lucena RFP, Medeiros PM, Araújo EL, Alves AGC, Albuquerque UP. The ecological apparency hypothesis and the importance of useful plants in rural communities from northeastern Brazil: An assessment based on use value. J Environ Manag. 2012;96:106–15.CrossRef
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
Begossi A. Ecologia humana: um enfoque das relações homem-ambiente. Interciencia. 1993;18(1):121–32.PubMed
45.
Begossi A. Sepetiba Bay project: an ecological approach to fishing communities. Human Ecology Bulletin, Spring/Summer. 1991;(7): 4-7.
46.
Pyke GH. Optimal foraging theory: a critical review. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 1984;15:523–75.CrossRef
47.
Sturtevant WC. Studies in ethnoscience. American Anthropologist. 1964, (3part2: Transcultural Studies in Cognition): 99-131.
48.
Alvard M, Alcorn JB, Bodmer RE, Hames R, Hill K, Hudson J, Lyman RL, Puri RK, Smith EA, Stearman AM. Intraspecific prey choice by Amazon hunters. Am Anthropol. 1995;36(5):789–818.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
CPRM. Serviço Geológico do Brasil (Recife, PE). Projeto cadastro de fontes de abastecimento por água subterrânea. Diagnóstico do município de Solânea, Estado da Paraíba. 2005.
54.
55.
Albuquerque UP, Sousa TA, Soldati GT. O “Retorno” das pesquisas Etnobiológicas para as comunidades. In: Albuquerque UP, Lucena RFP, Cunha LVFC, editors. Métodos e técnicas na pesquisa etnobiológica e etnoecológica. Recife: Nupeea; 2010.
56.
Huntington HP. Using traditional ecological knowledge in science: methods and applications. Ecol Appl. 2000;10(5):1270–4.CrossRef
57.
Confessor MVA, Mendonça LET, Mourão JS, Alves RRN. Animals to heal animals: ethonoveterinary practices in semi-arid region, northeastern Brazil. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2009;5:37.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
58.
Mc Bee K, Baker R.J. Dasypus novemcinctus. Mamm Species. 1982, 162: 1-9.
59.
Hayssen V. Tamandua tetradactyla (Pilosa: Myrmecophagidae). Mamm Species. 2011;43(1):64–74.CrossRef
60.
Bonvicino CR, Oliveira JA, D’Andrea PS. Guia dos roedores do Brasil, com chaves para gêneros baseadas em caracteres externos. Rio de Janeiro: Centro Pan-Americano de Febre Aftosa - OPAS/OMS; 2008. p. 12.
61.
62.
63.
García-Flores A, Lozano-García MA, Ortiz-Villaseñor AL, Monroy-Martinez R. Uso de mamíferos silvestres por habitantes del parque nacional el Tepozteco, Morelos, México. Etnobiología. 2014. 12 (3).
64.
Gonzalez JA, Vallejo JR. Vertebrados silvestres usados en la medicina popular del sector centro-occidente de Espana: una revision bibliografica. Etnobiología. 2014;12(1):1–22.
65.
Monroy R, Garcia-Flores A. La fauna silvestre com valor de uso en los huertos fruticolas tradicionales de la comunidad indigena de Xoxocotla, Morelos, Mexico. Etnobiología. 2013;11(1):44–52.
66.
Valle YG, Naranjo EJ, Caballero J, Martorell C, Ruan-Soto F, Enríquez PL. Cultural significance of wild mammals in mayan and mestizo communities of the Lacandon Rainforest, Chiapas, Mexico. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2015;11(36):1–13.
67.
IBGE - Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, Síntese de indicadores sociais: uma análise das condições de vida da população brasileira. Coordenação de populações e indicadores sociais, Rio de Janeiro: IBGE, Estudos e pesquisas - Informações demográficas e socioeconômicas, (35) (2015) 134.
68.
Silva AAS, Ferreira EC, Santos SS, TKN C, Lucena CM, Nunes GM, VJP MF, RFP L, RFP L. Utilização de plantas na veterinária popular no semiárido da Paraíba, vol. 1. Nordeste do Brasil.: FLOVET – Boletim do Grupo de Pesquisa da Flora, Vegetação e Etnobotânica; 2018. p. 37–60.
69.
Machado JS, Lucena CM, Santos SS, Ferreira EC, Nunes GM, RFP L. Conhecimento botânico local sobre cactáceas: um estudo de caso no município de Boqueirão, vol. 1. Paraíba, Nordeste do Brasil: FLOVET– Boletim do Grupo de Pesquisa da Flora, Vegetação e Etnobotânica; 2018. p. 1–21.
70.
Lima JRF, Santos SS, Lucena RFP. 2018. Uso de recursos faunísticos em uma comunidade rural do semiárido da Paraíba – Brasil. Etnobiología. 2018;16(3):36–53.
71.
Alves RRN, Policarpo IS, RRD B, HFP A. Perception and use of biodiversity in the vicinity of an urban conservation area, North eastern Brazil. Indian J Tradit Knowl. 2017;16:44–50.
72.
Lucena RFP, Albuquerque UP, Almeida CFCBR, Florentino ATN, Ferraz JSF. Plantas úteis da região semiárida do Nordeste do Brasil - Um olhar sobre a sua conservação e uso sustentável. Environ Monit Assess. 2005;125:281–90.CrossRef
73.
Pinto MF, Mourão JS, Alves RRN. Animal source foods consumed in two fishing communities on the northeast coast of Brazil. Environ Dev Sustain. 2017;19:679–92.CrossRef
74.
Monterrubio CL, Lara LEC, Pinera EJC, Torres FB. Uso y conservacion de mamiferos silvestres en uma comunidad de las canadas de la Selva Lacandona, Chiapas, Mexico. Etnobiología. 2007;5:99–107.
75.
Monroy-Vilchis O, Cabrera L, Suarez P, Zarco-González MM, Rodríguez-Soto C, Urios V. Uso tradicional de vertebrados silvestres en la Sierra Nanchititla, Mexico. Interciencia. 2008;33(4):308–13.
76.
Fa JE, Huste J, Burn RW, Broad G. Bushmeat consumption and preference of two ethnic groups in Bioko Island, West Africa. Hum Ecol. 2002;30:397–416.CrossRef
77.
Schenck M, Effa EN, Starkey M, Wilkie D, Abernethy KA, Telfer PT, Godoy R, Treves A. Why people eat bushmeat: Results from two-choice, taste tests in Gabon, Central Africa. Hum Ecol. 2006;34:433–45.CrossRef
78.
Alves RRN, Gonçalves MBR, Vieira WLS. Caça, uso e conservação de vertebrados no semiárido Brasileiro. Trop Conserv Sci. 2012;5(3):394–416.CrossRef
79.
Smith NJH. Utilization of game along Brazil’s Transamazon Highway. Acta Amazonica. 1976;6:455–66.CrossRef
80.
Pinto MF, Nascimento JLJ, Alves RRN, Meireles AJA. Qual a relação entre etnozoologia e território? Revista Ouricuri. 2013;3(2):068–88.
81.
Santos-Fita D, Naranjo EJ, Rangel-Salazar JL. Wildlife uses and hunting patterns in rural communities of the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2012;8(38):1–17.
82.
Ferreira FS, Fernandes-Ferreira H, Léo Neto NA, Brito SV, Alves RRN. The trade of medicinal animals in Brazil: current status and perspectives. Biodivers Conserv. 2013;22(4):839–70.CrossRef
83.
Souto WMS, Barboza RRD, Fernandes-Ferreira H, Magalhães Júnior AJC, Monteiro JM, Abi-chacra EA, Alves RRN. Zootherapeutic uses of wildmeat and associated products in the semiarid region of Brazil: general aspects and challenges for conservation. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2018;14(60):1–16.
84.
Alves RRN, Alves HN. The faunal drugstore: animal-based remedies used in traditional medicines in Latin America. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2011;7(1):43.CrossRef
85.
LET M, WLS V, RRN A. Caatinga ethnoherpetology: relationships between herpeto-fauna and people in a semiarid region of northeastern Brazil. Amphibian Reptile Conserv. 2014;8:24–32.
86.
Redford KH, Robinson JG. The game of choice: patterns of Indian and colonist hunting in the neotropics. American Anthropologist. 1987;89(3):650–67.CrossRef
87.
Fa JE, Brown D. Impacts of hunting on mammals in African tropical moist forests: a review and synthesis. Mammal Review. 2009;39(4):231–64.CrossRef
88.
Mendonça LET, Vasconcellos A, Souto CM, Oliveira TPR, Alves RRN. Bushmeat consumption and its implications for wildlife conservation in the semi-arid region of Brazil. Reg Environ Chang. 2015;16:1–9.
89.
Soares VMS, Soares HKL, Lucena RFP, Barboza RRD. Conhecimento, uso alimentar e conservação da avifauna cinegética: Estudo de caso no município de Patos, Paraíba. Inteciencia. 2018a;43(7):491–7.
90.
91.
Berkes F. 1984. Competition between commercial and sport fishermen: an ecological analysis. Hum Ecol. 1984;12(4):413–29.CrossRef
92.
Begossi A. The use of optimal foraging theory in the understanding strategies: a case from Sepetiba Bay (Rio de Janeiro state, Brazil). Hum Ecol. 1992;20(4):463–75.CrossRef
93.
Castro F, Begossi A. Ecology of fishing on the Grande River (Brazil): Technology and territorial rights. Fisheries Res. 1995;23:361–73.CrossRef
94.
Aswani S. Patterns of marine harvest effort in southwestern New Georgia, Solomon Islands: resource management or optimal foraging? Ocean Coastal Manag. 1998;40:207–35.CrossRef
95.
Bertrand S, Um B, Guevara-Carrasco R, Gerlotto F. Scale-invariant movements of fishermen: the same foraging strategy as natural predators. Ecol Appl. 2007;17(2):331–7.PubMedCrossRef
96.
Marchal P, Poos JJ, Quirijins F. Linkage between fishers foraging, market and fish stocks density: examples from some North Sea fisheries. Fisheries Res. 2007;83:33–43.CrossRef
97.
Robinson JG, Redford KH. Intrinsic rate of natural increase in neotropical forest mammals: relationship to phylogeny and diet. Oecologia. 1986a;68:516–20.PubMedCrossRef
98.
Robinson JG, Redford KH. Body size, diet, and population density of neotropical forest mammals. Am Nat. 1986;128(5):665–80.CrossRef
99.
Arita HT, Robinson JG, Redford KH. Rarity in neotropical forest mammals and its ecological correlates. Conserv Biol. 1990;4(2):181–92.CrossRef
100.
Parry L, Barlow J, Peres C, et al. Allocation of hunting effort by Amazonian smallholders: implications for conserving wildlife in mixed-use landscapes. Biol Conserv. 2009;142(8):1777–86.CrossRef
101.
Endo W, Peres CA, Salas E, Mori S, Sanches-Vega JL, Shepard GH, Pacheco V, Yu DW. Game vertebrate densities in hunted and non-hunted forest sites in Manu National Park, Peru. Biotropica. 2010;42(2):251–61.CrossRef
102.
Amori G, Chiozza F, Patterson BD, Rondinini C, Schipper J, Luiselli L. Species richness and distribution of neotropical rodents, with conservation implications. Mammalia. 2013;77(1):1–19.CrossRef
103.
Roberts M, Maliniak E, Deal M. The reproductive 'biology of the rock cavy, Kerodon rupestris, in captivity: a study of reproductive adaptation in a trophic specialist. Mammalia. 1984;48(2):1–14.CrossRef
104.
MMA – Ministerio do Meio Ambiete/Instituto Chico Mendes de conservação da biodiversidade. Livro Vermelho da fauna brasileira ameaçada de extinção. 2016
105.
Marinho Paulo H, Bezerra D, Antongiovanni M, Fonseca CR, Venticinque EM. Mamíferos de médio e grande porte da Caatinga do Rio Grande do Norte, Nordeste do Brasil. Mastozoología Neotropical. 2018;25(2):345–62.CrossRef
106.
Santos JC, Leal IR, Cortez JSA, Fernandes GW, Tabarelli M. Caatinga: the scientific negligence experienced by a dry tropical forest. Trop Conserv Sci. 2011;4(3):276–86.CrossRef
107.
Santos SS, HKL S, VMS S, RFP L. Traditional knowledge and use of mammals in a rural community in the Sertaneja Depression (Paraíba State, Northeast Brazil). Indian J Tradit Knowl. 2019;18(1):94–103.
108.
Dias DM, Bocchiglieri A. Trophic and spatio-temporal niche of the crab-eating fox, Cerdocyon thous (Linnaeus, 1766) (Carnivora: Canidae), in a remnant of the Caatinga in northeastern Brazil. Mammalia. 2015
109.
Peres C. Effects of subsistence hunting on vertebrate community structure in Amazonian forests. Conserv Biol. 1999;14(1):240–53.CrossRef
110.
111.
Azevedo FC, Lemos FG, Almeida LB, Campos CB, Beisiegel BM, Paula RC, Crawshaw Junior PG, Ferraz KMPMB, Oliveira TG. Avaliação do risco de extinção da Onça-parda Puma concolor (Linnaeus, 1771) no Brasil. Biodiversidade Brasileira. 2013;3(1):107–21.
112.
Albuquerque UP, Cunha LUFC, Lucena RFP, RRN A. Methods and Techniques in Ethnobiology and Ethnoecology. 1st ed. Berlim: Springer; 2014. p. 480.CrossRef
113.
Ribeiro JES, Carvalho TKN, Ribeiro JPO, Guerra NM, Silva N, Pedrosa KM, Alves CAB, Souza-Júnior SP, Souto JS, Nunes AT, Lima JRF, Oliveira RS, Lucena RFP. Ecological apparency hypothesis and availability of useful plants: testing different use values. Ethnobotany Res Appl. 2014;12:415–32.CrossRef
114.
Ribeiro JPO, Carvalho TKN, Ribeiro JES, Sousa RF, Lima JRF, Oliveira RS, Alves CAB, Lucena RFP. Can ecological apparency explain the use of plant species in the semi-arid depression of northeastern Brazil? Acta Botanica Brasilica. 2014, 28(3).CrossRef
115.
Nunes EM, Guerra NM, Arévalo-Marín E, Alves CAB, Nascimento VT, Cruz DD, Ladio AH, Silva SM, Oliveira RS, Lucena RFP. Local botanical knowledge of native food plants in the semiarid region of Brazil. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2018;14:49.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Use of mammals in a semi-arid region of Brazil: an approach to the use value and data analysis for conservation
Authors
Suellen da Silva Santos
Reinaldo Farias Paiva de Lucena
Hyago Keslley de Lucena Soares
Vanessa Moura dos Santos Soares
Natalice Santos Sales
Lívia Emanuelle Tavares Mendonça
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1746-4269
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-019-0313-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 1/2019 Go to the issue

Research

Traditional knowledge and cultural importance of Gardenia erubescens Stapf & Hutch. in Sudanian savanna of Burkina Faso

Research

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

Research

“A herder’s duty is to think”: landscape partitioning and folk habitats of Mongolian herders in a mountain forest steppe (Khuvsugul-Murun region)

Research

Island blues: indigenous knowledge of indigo-yielding plant species used by Hainan Miao and Li dyers on Hainan Island, China

Research

Wild edible plants collected by Hani from terraced rice paddy agroecosystem in Honghe Prefecture, Yunnan, China

Research

Fish consumption during menarche, menstruation, pregnancy and postpartum in Sikuani women from Meta, Colombia