Will McClatchey

Ethnobotany as a pharmacological research tool and recent developments in CNS-active natural products from ethnobotanical sources

The science of ethnobotany is reviewed in light of its multi-disciplinary contributions to natural product research for the development of pharmaceuticals and pharmacological tools. Some of the issues reviewed involve ethical and cultural perspectives of healthcare and medicinal plants. While these are not usually part of the discussion of pharmacology, cultural concerns potentially provide both challenges and insight for field and laboratory researchers. Plant evolutionary issues are also considered as they relate to development of plant chemistry and accessing this through ethnobotanical methods. The discussion includes presentation of a range of CNS-active medicinal plants that have been recently examined in the field, laboratory and/or clinic. Each of these plants is used to illustrate one or more aspects about the valuable roles of ethnobotany in pharmacological research. We conclude with consideration of mutually beneficial future collaborations between field ethnobotanists and pharmacologists.

The Quantum Co-Evolution Unit: An Example of ‘Awa (Kava—Piper methysticum G. Foster) in Hawaiian Culture

The Quantum Co-Evolution Unit: An Example of ‘Awa (Kava—Piper methysticum G. Foster) in Hawaiian Culture. The process of co-evolution occurs in many kinds of relationships and on various scales. One example of a co-evolutionary relationship is that of a plant and a culture with which it interacts. Such relationships are dynamic and ever changing. Researchers have discussed this concept and its implications for decades, yet no quantifiable unit or standardized scale has been accepted with which to measure this change. The theoretical “quantum co-evolution unit” (QCU) is proposed as the smallest measurable scale of interactions between plants and people. A collection of QCUs for a linked plant and human population would be its “ethnobotanical population.” This could be measured at various points in time to quantify the changing relationships between plants and people. These models set up a structure to discuss methodologies for quantifying co-evolutionary relationships such as are seen in the evolution of ethnobotanical populations. The co-evolving relationship between ‘awa (kava—Piper methysticum) and Hawaiian culture is used as an example to illustrate this idea.

The Long-Term Investment Strategy: Orchardists Observing and Reacting to Change

Abstract Agricultural management systems are found at the intersection between human societies and environmental dynamics. Traditional apple orchards are fruit production systems that were developed in Eurasia and transferred to many other regions around the world including a wide range of temperate to subtropical climates. We interviewed 255 long-term (20+ years) apple orchard managers in nine European countries and seven other countries that were former colonies. Patterns and types of management observations were compiled to illustrate descriptive aspects of orchard managers thinking. Observations and adaptive responses by orchard managers seem to share similarities that go beyond cultural and large-scale environmental differences. Orchard management systems appear to be adaptive responses by traditional orchardists not only for local environments but also for success in unknown, newly encountered environments and therefore might be expected to cope with climate change and functionally adapt to ecosystem variation due to that change.

A Mouthful of Diversity: Knowledge of Cider Apple Cultivars in the United Kingdom and Northwest United States

A Mouthful of Diversity: Knowledge of Cider Apple Cultivars in the United Kingdom and Northwest United States. There is a general assumption in the study of folk taxonomy that those people who have been interacting with a given crop the longest have the most knowledge about the crop’s names. We treated this as an hypothesis which can be tested with knowledge of cider apples. This use of apples extends back many generations in some places, while in other regions people are just learning to make cider. The experimental design is to assess quantitatively the cider apple diversity being used compared to the knowledge of this diversity by cider makers. The test involves two populations of cider makers: those who come from a long-standing tradition of cider making and those who recently learned to make cider. Research was conducted in parts of England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and Washington State, U.S.A. Semistructured interviews and questionnaires were used to elicit cider apple variety names. Traditional knowledge associated with cider production was also collected. Eighty-two cider apple variety names were obtained. In addition, it is estimated that between 111 and 328 varieties were recognized but could not be named. There was a significant difference between the cider apple cultivars that cider makers could name and those that they could discern. On average, cider makers could name eight varieties, but discern 16 varieties of cider apples largely on the basis of appearance, taste, and smell. There was no significant difference in the knowledge of cider apple variety names between long-standing cider makers and those that recently learned to make cider. As with cider apples, we would expect that farmers of other culturally-significant crops would not always know named diversity if there are other cues to let them track varietal difference, such as appearance, taste, or smell.