Keywords

Hillocks, Gingee hills, Ethnobotanical devices.

INTRODUCTION

Gingee is a heritage town bounded by hills. The town falls under the geographical coordinates of 12°.15’N and 79°.25’E., above the Mean Sea Level of 30.45m. The town comprises of a number of small and large hills with rocky outcrops are found here and there. Gingee Forest Range consists of seven Reserve Forests and one Reserve Plains. They are: Gangavaram Reserve Forest (2681.87 ha), Thandavasamudram Reserve Forest (318.49 ha), Poolanjimalai Reserve Forest (236.94 ha), Pakkamalai (2263.81 ha), Siruvadi (1360.16 ha), Muttakadu (1289.72 ha), Padipallam (1457.28 ha) and Karai Reserve Plains (686.75 ha). All these Reserve Forests are located in the south west direction from Gingee towns. There are lots of isolated hillocks present and they are the offshoot of Eastern Ghats. There are 26 villages situated around these Reserve Forest areas. The town has hot, dry climate almost throughout the year. The maximum temperature and the minimum temperature of the town are 36 to 30 C respectively. The town receives rain mainly during the months of October, November through the North East monsoon. On an average the town receives 700mm of rainfall.

Currently the Government of India, realizing the value of the country’s vast range of medicinal plants, has embarked on a mission of documenting the traditional knowledge about plants and herbs. The World Health Organization has also recognized the importance of traditional medicine and has created strategies, guidelines and standards for botanical medicines. Over the past decade, there has been a resurgence of interest in the investigation of natural materials as a source of potential drugs. This current research endeavor strives to document the indigenous knowledge on the invaluable therapeutic properties. The data presented here were mostly from personal interviews using a standard questionnaire. The detailed information includes medicinal uses as well as dosage and mode of administration. Besides, the data collected from such interviews are also analyzed using qualitative ethnobotanical techniques to ascertain the importance given to each medicinal plant species in the study area.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Frequent field trips were undertaken in order to survey the inhabitants of our study area (hillocks of Gingee hills of Eastern Ghats, Villupuram District, Tamilnadu) and to make collections of native medicinal plants. Information regarding medicinal plants was obtained in meetings with farmers who practiced indigenous medicine. An attempt was also made to survey the Kuravas and Irulas who also practiced indigenous medicine. In many cases, it was first necessary to gain a good rapport with these people in order to win over their confidence. The informants together with Irulas and Kuravas consisted of 74 % of male and 26 % of female. Out of 128 informants, 54 were Irulas and Kuravas and the remaining were farmers and herbal practitioners. According to the age, most of the informants were about 40-60 years old and the other interviewees were 20-40 years followed by 60-80 years respectively. According to the socio-demographic status, the literacy rate among the local inhabitants is comparatively higher than that of the Irulas and Kuravas. However, these two tribes are already in the mainstream in many aspects. Women informants in general showed much enthusiasm in the present research. The gathered data was crosschecked for reliability and accuracy by interacting with different groups of the farmers from different habitats to confirm the use, mode of administration and dosage differences of the herbal materials, if any. The collected materials were carefully brought to the laboratory for identification. Herbarium sheets for all the collected plant specimens were prepared (RHT No. from 65205 to 65596) and deposited in the Rapinat Herbarium, Tiruchirappalli (RHT), St. Joseph’s College, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India. Plants in Table 1 are arranged alphabetically in order of their botanical names, followed by the family and a brief note on the plant parts used, use of ethnobotanical devices and their chemical properties.

Table 1. Ethnomedicinal Plant Species used for curing different ailments along with their use value and chemical properties and other findings

Data analysis

Quantitative techniques had been used in the ethnobotanical studies to compare the uses and the cultural importance of different plant taxa. These analyses are of great scientific interest as they reflect cultural value systems, and they may also aid in the conservation of biodiversity [1]. The data collected through interview of the informants was analyzed using three different quantitative tools namely use value (UV), factor informant consensus (Fic) and fidelity level (Fl %). The relative importance (RI) was calculated employing the use-value [2] which is a quantitative measure for the relative importance of species known locally.

Use value (UV)

Ever since the publication of the Use-Value index proposed by Phillips and Gentry [3,4] (modified from Prance [5]), similar approaches had been widely used by many different authors [6-12]. The technique of Use- Value, which is based on the number of uses and the number of people that cite a given plant, has been widely used within the ethnobotanical community to indicate the species that are considered most important by a given population [8,12]. It is one of the most common approaches which had been to associate the Use-Value with questions of conservation, based on the idea that the most important species would suffer the greatest harvesting pressure [6].

UV = ΣU/n

Where U is the number of usereports cited by each informant for a given species and n refers to the total number of informants. Use values are high when there are many use-reports for a plant, implying that the plant is important, and approach zero (0) when there are few reports related to its use. The use value, however, does not distinguish whether a plant is used for single or multiple purposes.

Relative importance (RI)

The technique of Relative Importance (RI) [13] was developed primarily for measuring the usefulness of medicinal plants. The RI value is derived from the number of indications (of pharmacological properties) for that species and from the number ailments that it is used to treat. As such, the importance of a species increases if it is used to treat more infirmities. As this technique was conceived, it would be possible to calculate the Relative Importance of a medicinal plant based only on secondary sources (journal publication, for example). Although the Relative Importance technique is much less used than the Use- Value, we chose to examine it here due its usefulness of calculation. Both techniques consider the number of uses attributed to a given taxon in determining its importance [6,2] but they differ in that only the Use-Value technique includes the number of people that cite information for a given taxon (i.e. it is directly based on informant consensus).

Factor informant consensus (Fic)

Phillips [2] in ethnobotanical techniques, pointed out that procedures based on “informant consensus” tend be more objective as they are designed to eliminate investigator bias in attributing relative importance to a given plant. To test homogeneity of knowledge about the medicinal plants, the factor informant consensus (Fic) was used. The Fic was calculated as:

Where, nur refers to the number of the use-reports for a particular use category and nt refers to the number of taxa used for a particular use category by all informants. Fic values are low (near 0) if plants are chosen randomly or if there is no exchange of information about their use among informants and approach one (1) when there is a well-defined selection criterion in the community and/or if information is exchanged between informants.

Fidelity level (Fl %)

Because many plant species may be used in the same category, it is interesting to determine the most preferred species used in the treatment of particular ailment which can be done with the fidelity level (Fl %) [14]. The fidelity level is calculated as:

Where Np is the number of usereports cited for a given species for a particular ailment and N is the total number of use-reports cited for any given species. High Fl value (near 100%) is obtained for plants which almost all use reports refer to the same way of using it, whereas low Fl value is obtained for plants that are used for many different purposes.

RESULTS

The local population of Gingee hills had a good knowledge of ethnomedicinal plants as they were using 163 plants from 62 families to cure 39 ailments of humans and animals. Older informants were more knowledgeable on ethnomedicinal plant species than younger informants. The knowledge on indigenous medicinal plant use was declining among the younger generation which may be attributed to access to higher education in the community and the lack of interest among the younger generation to inherit and use ethnomedicinal knowledge. Irulas and Kuravas in this region too had considerably sound knowledge of ethnomedicinal plants. Dayby- day their knowledge of medicinal plants and uses also found declining which may be attributed to their inward integration with other rural people. (See table 1.)

DISCUSSION

In this study, a total of 163 species belonging to 138 genera and 62 families are documented (Table1). Out of these, 154 species (94 %) were dicots and 7 species (4%) were monocots and 2 species (1%) were Pteridophytes. Majority of the taxa were growing in wild (141 species), 13 species were purely cultivated and 10 species existed in both wild and cultivated forms. In terms of number of species used, Rubiaceae (12) appeared to be the most dominant family followed by Euphorbiaceae (11), Papilionoideae (9), Asclepiadaceae (8), Apocynaceae, Verbenaceae and Acanthaceae have 6 each. The next is Rutaceae, Ebenaceae and Sterculiaceae have 5 each followed by Caesalpiniaceae and Cucurbitaceae have 4 each. Genus Diospyros has 4 species and while Strychnos and Acalypha have 3 species. The plant parts used for medicinal preparation were leaf, stem, stem bark, sap, flower, seed, fruit and underground parts. There were instances of whole plant being used also. The most frequently used plant parts were leaves from 99 species (60%), root from 43 species (26%), fruits and seeds from 32 species (20%), stem and stem bark from 24 species (15%) and flowers from 10 species (6%).

Qualitative techniques such as Factor Informant Consensus (Fic), Use-Value (UV), Relative Importance (RI) and Fidelity Level (Fl) have been employed to analyze the usefulness of the ethno species and also to eliminate any bias in attributing relative importance to a given plant. On the basis of use-value (UV), the most important medicinal species of the present study area were: Nerium oleander (UV=60), Ormocarpum sennoides (UV=60), Zehneria scabra (UV=57), Limonia acidissima (UV=55), Strychnos minor (UV=55), Acalypha indica (UV=52), Cleistanthus collinus (UV=50), Sphaeranthus indicus (UV=49), Ventilago madraspatana (UV=49), Ocimum canum (UV=47), Achyranthes aspera (UV=45), Dioscorea pentaphylla (UV=42), Ixora finlaysoniana (UV=42), Radermachera xylocarpa (UV=42), Cocculus hirsutus (UV=39), Enicostemma hyssopifolium (UV=36) and Dalbergia lanceolaria (UV=33).

On the basis of factor informant consensus (Fic), as many as 39 ailments were observed to be cured by 163 plant species in the study area. These ailments were classified into categories according to Heinrich [15]. The maximum species were used to cure various dermal diseases (22 species) followed by rheumatism (22 species), gastric troubles (17 species), antidote for poisonous bites (15 species), cuts and wounds (14 species), gynecological problems (13 species), joint pains (12 species), veterinary purposes (12 species), dysentery (12 species), boils (11 species) and cough and cold (11 species). Fidelity level (Fl) values in this study varied from 0.61 % to 60.12%. For the better accuracy, species mentioned by less than five informants were not considered in the final analysis. Some of them include: Ormocarpum sennoides (Fl= 60%), Nerium oleander (60%), Zehneria scabra (55%), Strychnos roxburghiana (55%), Limonia acidissima (55%), Acalypha indica (52%), Cleistanthus collinus (52%), Sphaeranthus indicus (49%), Ventilago madraspatana (49%), Ocimum canum (47%), Strychnos nux-vomica (45%), Achyranthes aspera (45%), Jatropha glandulifera (44%), Bauhinia tomentosa (42%), Dioscorea pentaphylla (42%), Ixora finlaysoniana (42%), Radermachera xylocarpa (42%) and Tarenna asiatica (42%).

In an ethnomedicinal plant, various parts namely root, stem, leaves, fruit, flower, bark, seed etc. are used in one way or other. Often the same plant is used for several preparations by using different plant parts. It is inferred from the interviews that not all parts contain the same quality of ingredient that is beneficial for the preparation of the medicine. Discovering that part which has high content of component is very vital for preparation and administration of medicine to cure any disease and for its efficacy. The underground parts (root, root bark, rhizome, bulb, tubers) of about 20 species are used for treating various diseases. This is a factor to be considered since distribution of the above species in the wild would become vulnerable and threatened in the course of time. Though the inhabitants of Gingee hills are aware of the effects of destructive collection, yet they need to be motivated regarding sustainable use of the above species.

In the present study, it is observed that from plants belonging to 62 families and 163 species, 16 medicinally important plants are used by Irulas and Kuravas to cure various diseases such as respiratory, urinary and alimentary diseases followed by scabies and bone fracture. Over all, the knowledge of these tribal people in ethnomedicine is much less as compared to the local inhabitants. However, ailments for respiratory, urinary, alimentary, dermal and bone fracture remain the most important information shared by them which are continued to be quiet relevant to the present day situation. On the basis of use-value (UV), the most important medicinal species used by Irulas and Kuravas in the study site were Andrographis echioides, Cassia auriculata, Phyllanthus reticulatus, Sapindus emarginatus, Ormocarpum sennoides and Zehneria scabra are used for such ailments. Among the list of diseases, the herbalists and local inhabitants use medicinal plants particularly those pertaining to dermal disorder or skin diseases, Rheumatic ailments are very significant since 44 species in total are used against these ailments followed by gastric disorder or stomach ailments (17), arthritis (13) and gynecological problems (13) in menstruating women. About 12 species are documented for the veterinary purposes.

From this account it is clear that the local inhabitants and Kuravas and Irulas of Gingee hills possess the ability to discern the character of various plants and their beneficial properties. It is interesting to note that such a way of life, particularly with respect to health care practices, has hardly undergone any change even to the present day. Similar ethnobotanical uses of the species have been reported in some other parts of India (see other findings in Table 1). Apart from the current findings, ethnobotanical surveys conducted so far in Gingee hills were sought for the accuracy of the studies. Muralidharan and Narasimhan [16] reported the medicinal plants of Gingee hills such as Achyranthes aspera (leaf) and Phyla nodiflora (leaf) used for piles. They also listed the following plants used for dysentery such as Cadaba fruticosa (leaf), Cardiospermum halicacabum (leaf), Cassia tora (leaf), Diospyros montana (bark), Ficus benghalensis (bark), Morinda pubescens (leaf) Phyllanthus reticulatus (leaf, Toddalia asiatica (leaf); Scutia myrtina (leaf) and Pergularia daemia (root) for stomach-ache and Ocimum tenuiflorum (leaf) for indigestion.

Sankaranarayanan [17] reported the medicinal plants of Villupuram district such as Atalantia monophylla (leaf) for rheumatoid pain, joint pain and glandular swelling, Achyranthes aspera (shoot and leaf) for dog bite and other poisonous bites, and leaf for tuberculosis, Barleria prionitis (leaf, bark and root), leaf for cataract and fever, bark for cough and leaf for toothache, boils and glandular swellings, Cissampelos pareira (root) for wound healing, antidote, fistula, skin disorders, indigestion, stomach pain, diarrhea and dysentery, Cadaba fruticosa (leaf) for general weakness and energetic during dysentery and diarrohea, Enicostemma littorale (leaf) for rheumatism, abdominal ulcers, hernia, itches, swellings and insect bites, Helicteres isora (root, fruit) root for cuts and wounds, fruit for ear diseases, Ixora coccinea (flowers) for dysentery, leucorrhoea, bronchitis and scabies, Indigofera aspalathoides (root) for chronic eczema, acute tumour, psoriasis, toothache and abscess, Phyllanthus niruri (leaf) for digestive, simulative, carminative and aphrodisiac, Trichodesma indicum (whole plant) for emollient and diuretic, root for dysentery, cough, cold, fever and joint pain. Jagatheeswari [18] reported medicinal plants of Villupuram such as Acalypha indica (leaf) for itching, skin disorders, Achyranthus aspera (leaf) for joint pain, toothache, Cassia auriculata (leaf) for muscle pain, body pain and gastric problems, Calotropis gigantea (leaf, root) for cattle, root for leprosy and leucoderma, Erythrina indica (leaf) for cold and cough, Eucalyptus globulus (leaf) for cough and cold, Figus religiosa (leaf) for body pain, Morinda oleifera (whole plant) for rheumatism, body strengthening, and sexual hormones, Nerium oleander (stem bark) for ear pain, Ocimum sanctum (leaf) for cough, dizziness, headache and Phyllanthus amarus (leaf) for jaundice.

Some of the medicinal properties of the plant species mentioned in the present work have already been scientifically validated on the basis of pharmacological assays. Reddy [19] showed the use of Acalypha ciliata (leaf) for wound healing; Gopalakrishnan [20] showed experimentally that the leaf of Acalypha fruiticosa for curing wounds and skin diseases; Gobalakrishnan [21] showed the use of Allmania nodiflora (leaf) for cold; Anisomeles malabarica (leaf) for fever [22]; Anisomeles indica (leaf, root) for swellings [23]; Atalantia racemosa (leaf, fruit) for rheumatic pain [17]; Bryonia laciniosa (leaf) for inflammations [23]; Bulbophyllum kaitense (root) for anticancer [24]; Cadaba fruticosa (leaf) for rheumatic related problems [25]; Cymbidium aloifolium (whole plant) for bone settings [26]; Canthium dicoccum (root bark) for joint pains [27]; Caralluma umbellata (stem) for stomach disorders [28]; Carissa carandas (root, stem, fruit) for hepatoprotection [29]; Cleistanthus phlomoides (stem, leaf) as poison [30]. Khare [31] mentioned the use of Dendrophthoe falcata (leaf) for menstrual disorder; Diospyros montana (bark, leaf, fruit) for skin diseases [32,33]; Diospyros peregrine (fruit, leaf) for tumour [31].

CONCLUSION

It is evident from this study that the medicinal plants still play a vital role in the primary healthcare of indigenous people in the study area. The information we gathered from the inhabitants of Gingee hills may be useful to other researchers in the fields of ethnobotany, taxonomy and pharmacology. Hopefully, this study offers a model for studying the relationship between plants and people within the contexts of a traditional medical system. The purpose of standardizing traditional remedies is obviously to ensure therapeutical efficacy; whereas the value of ethnomedicinal information in modern pharmacology lies in the development of new drugs. Lastly, this study has generated a broad spectrum of information concerning the use of medicinal plants by indigenous tribal groups.

REFERENCES

1. Byg A, Baslev, H. 2001. Diversity and use de palms in Zahamena, eastern Madagascar, Biodiversity and Conservation, (10): 951- 970.
2. Philips, O. 1996. Some quantitative methods for analyzing ethnobotanical knowledge in selected guidelines for ethnobotanical research: a field manual edited by M. Alexiades, New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, New York, pp 171-197.
3. Philips O, Gentry A.H. 1993a. The useful plants of Tambopata, Peru: I. Statistical hypothesis tests with a new quantitative technique, Economic Botany, (47): 15-22.
4. Philips O, Gentry A.H. 1993b. The useful plants of Tambopata, Peru: II. Additional hypothesis testing in quantitative ethnobotany, Economic Botany, (47): 33-43.
5. Prance, G.T., W. Balée, B.M. Boom, R.L. Carneiro. 1987. Quantitative ethnobotany and the case for conservation in Amazonian, Conservation Biology, (1):296-310.
6. Albuquerque, U.P, Lucena R.F.P. 2004a. Selecao e escolha dos informants in Methods e tecnicas na pesquisa etnobotanica, Org. edited by U.P. Albuquerque, Lucena R.F.P. Nupeea, Recife, pp. 19-35.
7. Cunha L.V.F.C, Albuquerque, U.P. 2006. Quantitative ethnobotany in an Atlantic forest fragment of northeast Brazil- implications to conservation, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, (114): 1-25.
8. Galeano, G. 2000. Forest use at the Pacific Coast of Chocó, Colômbia: A quantitative approach, Economic Botany, (54):358-376.
9. Gomez-Beloz, A. 2002. Plant use knowledge of the Winikina warao: the case for questionnaires in ethnobotany, Economic Botany, (56): 231-241.
10. Kristensen, M, Balslev H. 2003. Perceptions, use and availability of woody plants among the Gourounsi in Burkina Faso, Biodiversity and Conservation, (12): 1715-1739.
11. Kvist, L.P, Andersen M.K, Stagegaard J, Hesselsoe M, Llapapasca. 2001. Extraction from woody forest plants in flood plain communities in Amazonian Peru: use, choice, evaluation and conservation status of resources, Forest Ecology and Management, (150): 147-174.
12. Torre-Cuadros, M.A, Islebe G.A. 2003. Traditional ecological knowledge and use of vegetation in southeastern Mexico: a case study from Solferino, Quintana Roo, Biodiversity and Conservation, (12): 2455- 2476.
13. Bennett, B.C, Prance G.T.. 2000. Introduced Plants in the Indigenous Pharmacopeia of Northern South América, Economic Botany, (54):90-102.
14. Friedman, J., Yaniv, Z., Dafni, A., Palewitch, D., 1986. A preliminary classification of the healing potential of medicinal plants, based on a rational analysis of an ethnopharmacological field survey among Bedouins in the Negev desert, Israel, Journal of Ethnopharmacology, (16): 275 – 287.
15. Heinrich M, Ankli A, Frei B, Weimann C, Sticher O. 1998. Medicinal plants in Mexico: Healers' consensus and cultural importance, Social Science and Medicine, (47):1863–1875.
16. Muralidharan R, Narasimhan D. 2012. Plants used for topical application from Gingee hills, Tamil Nadu, India, Current Botany, 3(4): 49-52.
17. Sankaranarayanan S, Bama P, Ramachandran J, Kalaichelvan P.T, Deccaraman M1, Vijayalakshimi M, Dhamotharan R, Dananjeyan B and Sathya Bama S. 2010. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used by traditional users in Villupuram district of Tamil Nadu, India, Journal of Medicinal Plants Research, 4(12): 1089-1101.
18. Jagatheeswari D. 2012. A Survey of Some Medicinally Important Plants in Villupuram District of Tamil Nadu, India, International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biological Archives, 3(4): 905- 909.
19. Reddy J.S, Rao P.R, Reddy M.S. 2002. Wound healing effects of Heliotropium indicum, Plumbago zeylanicum and Acalypha indica in rats, Journal of Ethnopharmacology, (79): 249-251.
20. Gopalakrishnan Subbarayan, Krishnasami Saroja, Jeyaseelan Dulcy Elizabeth. 2010. Chemical investigation of aerial parts of Acalypha fruticosa Forssak, Der Parma Chemica, 2(5): 383-389.
21. Gobalakrishnan R, Kulandaivelu M, Bhuvaneswari R, Kandavel D, Kannan L. 2013. Screening of wild plant species for antibacterial activity and phytochemical analysis of Tragia involucrata L., Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis, 3(6):460-465.
22. Ramaraj Rameshprabhu, Yuwalee Unpaprom. 2013. Medicinally potential plant of Anisomeles malabarica (L.) R. Br., Journal of Agricultural Research and Extension, 30(3): 29-39.
23. Oudhia P. 2010. Traditional Medicinal Knowledge about an Obnoxious Weed Jal Kumbhi (Eichhornea crassipes) in Chhattisgarh (India). Aquaphyte, 21 (2): 18.
24. Kalaiarasan A, S. A. John. 2011. “Phytochemical screening and antibacterial activity of Sida cordifolia L. (Malvaceae) leaf extract”. International Journal of Medicobiological Research, 1(2): 94-98.
25. Patel, R.S, Patel Hitesh R. 2013. Ethnobotanical plants used by the tribes of R.D.F. Poshina forest range of Sabarkantha district, North Gujarat, India, International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications,3(2): 1-8.
26. Radhika B, Murthy J.V.V.S.N, Nirmala Grace. 2013. Preliminary phytochemical analysis and antibacterial activity against clinical pathogens of medicinally important orchid Cymbidium aloifolium (L.) SW, International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research, 4(10): 3925-3931.
27. Ayyanar M, Ignacimuthu, S. 2008. Herbal medicines for wound healing among tribal people in Southern India: Ethnobotanical and scientific evidences, International Journal of Applied Research in Natural Products, 2(3): 29-42.
28. Vedavathy S, Mrudula V, Sudhakar A. 1997. Tribal medicine of Chittoor district, Department of Botany, Sri Venkateswara Arts and Science College, Andhra Pradesh, India.
29. Devmurari V, Shivanand P, Goyani M.B, Vaghani S, Jivani N.P. 2010. A Review: Carissa Congesta: Phytochemical Constituents, Traditional Use and Pharmacological properties, Pharmacognosy Reviews, 3(6):375-377.
30. Shrivastava Neeta, Tejas Patel. 2007. Clerodendrum and Healthcare: An Overview, Medicinal and Aromatic Plant Science and Biotechnology, 1(1): 142-150.
31. Khare, C.P. 2007. An Illustrated Dictionary of Indian Medicinal Plants, Springer Science and Business Media, LLC, New York, USA.
32. Burkill, I.H. 1966. Dictionary of the economic products of the Malay Peninsula, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Vol. 1.
33. Marston, A., Msonthi, J.D and Hostettman, K. 1984. Antifungal activity of Diospyros montana, Planta Medica, 279.