12
Journal of Ethnophamacology, 25 (1989) 139-150 Elsevier Scientific Publishers Ireland Ltd. 139 Review Paper METHODS FOR ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL FIELD WORK FRANK J. LIPP Department of Anthropology, New school for Social Research, New York, NY 10003 (U.S.A.) (Accepted January 22, 1988) Summary This paper describes the interdisciplinary methods used in the recording and collecting of ethnopharmacological field data. General considerations of procedure and interviewing, the collection of botanical and pharmacological specimens, procedures of data collection in field studies of medicinal plants, and the field screening of drug plants are discussed. Introduction In ethnopharmacological field work, scientific methods of investigation must be used and adhered to as strictly as in any other field of scientific endeavour. The methods and techniques of ethnopharmacological research are of great importance and the qualitative value of the results obtained can be measured to a great extent by the methods used to obtain them. Since field work in ethnopharmacology necessitates the use of botanical, ethno- graphic and pharmacological methods, the investigator must be well groun- ded in all three in order to obtain maximum results. In an effort to enhance the interdisciplinary nature of ethnopharmacology this paper describes the social and biological field methods and equipment used in the study and collection of medicinal and other biodynamic plants. Other aspects of ethnobotanical research, such as the study of drug plants sold in markets and edible cultigens require somewhat different methods and are beyond the scope of this paper (see Archer, 194513; F’rankel and Bennett, 1970; Her- nandez, 197 1, and Van den Berg, 1984). General considemtions Successful ethnopharmacological research is dependent upon gaining entree and establishing rapport with an indigenous group. To approach a 0378-8741/89/$04.55 @ 1989 Elsevier Scientific Publishers Ireland Ltd Published and Printed in Ireland

Methods for ethnopharmacological field work

  • Upload
    frank-j

  • View
    215

  • Download
    3

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Methods for ethnopharmacological field work

Journal of Ethnophamacology, 25 (1989) 139-150 Elsevier Scientific Publishers Ireland Ltd.

139

Review Paper

METHODS FOR ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL FIELD WORK

FRANK J. LIPP

Department of Anthropology, New school for Social Research, New York, NY 10003 (U.S.A.)

(Accepted January 22, 1988)

Summary

This paper describes the interdisciplinary methods used in the recording and collecting of ethnopharmacological field data. General considerations of procedure and interviewing, the collection of botanical and pharmacological specimens, procedures of data collection in field studies of medicinal plants, and the field screening of drug plants are discussed.

Introduction

In ethnopharmacological field work, scientific methods of investigation must be used and adhered to as strictly as in any other field of scientific endeavour. The methods and techniques of ethnopharmacological research are of great importance and the qualitative value of the results obtained can be measured to a great extent by the methods used to obtain them. Since field work in ethnopharmacology necessitates the use of botanical, ethno- graphic and pharmacological methods, the investigator must be well groun- ded in all three in order to obtain maximum results. In an effort to enhance the interdisciplinary nature of ethnopharmacology this paper describes the social and biological field methods and equipment used in the study and collection of medicinal and other biodynamic plants. Other aspects of ethnobotanical research, such as the study of drug plants sold in markets and edible cultigens require somewhat different methods and are beyond the scope of this paper (see Archer, 194513; F’rankel and Bennett, 1970; Her- nandez, 197 1, and Van den Berg, 1984).

General considemtions

Successful ethnopharmacological research is dependent upon gaining entree and establishing rapport with an indigenous group. To approach a

0378-8741/89/$04.55 @ 1989 Elsevier Scientific Publishers Ireland Ltd Published and Printed in Ireland

Page 2: Methods for ethnopharmacological field work

140

native with notebook and pencil and arbitrarily demand answers is the surest way to arouse resentment and reticence (Train et al., 1941). In order to create an atmosphere of trust, the field worker must exhibit a genuine sense of warmth, empathy and respect for his informants not by acting so but by being so in his actions and words. The subject’s ability to sense and respond to our warmth or coldness, our involvement or our facade, neces- sitates treating someone of another culture, ethnic group or world view as a respected equal and understanding him (or her) in terms of his ideas and values rather than in terms of our own. Although the field worker remains committed to the values of his empirical discipline, he should behave as a human being, not a technician, and cast aside any mask or “professional role” that may create barriers between informant and researcher. When we feel that we require more information or more details, we should not press immediately to obtain them if this involves cutting off the informant’s train of thought. For if we do so, he will then think that we are more interested in what appears important to us rather than what is significant to him and that he must adapt his interest to ours. The foregoing recommendations apply especially in situations where the researcher is impinging upon areas sensitive to the culture bearers (e.g. anti-fertility plants) and where herbal knowledge is the zealously guarded “trade secret” of certain individuals or families.

Methods of selecting informants are dependent upon the distribution of botanical folk-knowledge in the population. Quite often this knowledge is the property of older individuals, shaman or semi-professional herbal spe- cialists of a community. However, there are groups which have a high degree of herbal knowledge distributed throughout the general populace. This condition permits the use of sampling methods in selecting informants and cross-checking information provided by several individuals (Co&ran and Cornfield, 1951). In situations where the field workers must rely on the expertise of a few individuals, key-informant interviewing combined with direct observation is used to best advantage (Kluckhohn, 1940; Schwartz and Schwartz, 1955; Becker, 1958; Young and Young, 1961; Martin, 1974). Unstructured and open-ended interviewing techniques are usually employed although certain problems, such as the health condition of a community, call for structured questionnaires and interview schedules (Junker, 1960; Glock, 1967; Mishler, 1986).

A clearer picture of ethnobotanical field work can be gained by illustrat- ing a typical day’s work. Prior to any trip into the field, a plan should be worked out with the informant(s) as to what plants are to be collected that day and their locality. This is quite advantageous, since the procuring of one specimen alone sometimes requires a full day’s journey. Informants should never be sent out alone to collect, since they have a tendency to collect fragmentary or only usable parts, which will preclude positive identification. Detailed notes should be taken as each specimen is discussed and collected in the field. It is unsafe to remember the data for specimens indefinitely without writing down the details. After reaching camp, all

Page 3: Methods for ethnopharmacological field work

141

material should be re-examined and reviewed with the informants, before pressing. The advantages of using several informants in doing this are that they discuss the specimens in question among themselves, arriving at conclusions and eliciting facts that one individual does not know and that faulty linguistic transcription due to individual speech differences are avoided. In a group setting there is also less restraint with questions being answered more readily. However, in cultural groups where each family has secret remedies for ailments which they do not want freely circulated, it would be a mistake to work with larger groups.

Every week the material and notes should be carefully reviewed with the informants. This is particularly salutary in correcting errors, such as in linguistic transcription which are made quite easily. Verifying the accuracy of information obtained is best undertaken in as congenial an atmosphere as possible. A higher degree of work is usually elicited if the questioning is interspersed with a coffee or light conversation. These sessions should be conducted as systematically as possible, so that the informants, after a few sessions, know the procedural mechanics involved.

Although the use of bilingual informants is preferable, in many cases traditional medical practitioners will be monolingual, so that interviewing must be carried out through additional bilingual interpreters. Non-Western languages commonly possess phonetic sounds, such as glottal stops and pitch variation, which are unnoticeable to European ears, difficult to pronounce and even more difficult to record. Unless the researcher has received linguistic training in phonemic and phonetic transcription or uses a tape recorder, his only recourse is to make the best, approximate attempt at transcription, using ordinary phonetic orthography (Pike, 1971; Samarin, 1967).

The recording of ethnophurmacological field data

It is advisable to record data both on field labels and a notebook. The labels of small slips of quality paper (7 x 10 cm) are included with the plant in its newspaper fold and contain the essential recorded data. These labels can later be retyped when the specimens are forwarded to plant taxonomists for scientific identification. In typing the herbaria sheet labels, room should be left for the specimen’s scientific name and the name of the botanist making the determination.

The information to be recorded on the label for each specimen is as follows :

(1) Number. The collector’s number ties the data to the specimen and facilitates reference to the specimen. The specimens are numbered consecutively as they are collected in one series of numbers for a single collector throughout his career. Do not use the same number more than once since this creates confusion for botanists studying the

Page 4: Methods for ethnopharmacological field work

142

(2)

(3) (4) (5) (6)

(7) (3)

(9) (10) (11)

material. Duplicate specimens receive the same number. If there is any doubt as to their being the same species, use separate numbers for each. Date of collecting. Locality (country, province and village). Altitude, if possible. Habitat (vegetation type, soil, moisture conditions). Description of plant (herb, tree, shrub, vine), stature, and features lost in drying (odor, flower and/or fruit color); presence of latex, resin; any physical reactions: hives, allergies, smarting. The flowering period is important if subsequent collections will be made or if the specimen is collected in a non-flowering period. Plants without flowers and fruits are almost useless for later botanical classification. Plant state (cultivated, semi-cultivated, wild). Name in language of indigenous group and etymological translation of this name. Uses of the plant, mode of preparation and parts used. General remarks. Name of collector.

All the information described above should also be written as a per- manent record in a hardcovered field notebook (20 x 13 cm). In moist, tropical climates the notebook is best kept in a plastic zip-lock bag. In addition to providing a means of clearing up confusions later, the notebook permits the addition of detailed and complete descriptions of the exact method of preparation and use for each specimen collected. In terms of plants which may be biologically or chemically active, the researcher should strive for a description of its method of preparation and use, which is as detailed and complete as possible. A single fact or series of facts obtained from actual observations have a greater and more permanent value than an indefinite amount of information obtained by hearsay or carelessly recorded (Coville, 1895). For example, for piscicides, the investigator should make exact observations as to how the plant is prepared and used, combined with annotating the practitioners’ explication of their behavior. With regard to psychoactive plants used in ritual contexts, this will require a detailed ethnographic description of the rite itself (See Johnston (1977) and Wasson et al. (1974) for exemplary models).

Data to be collected for medicinal plants should include the following additional information and procedures.

(I) Plant drug (1) Name of ethnic group utilizing medicine. (2) Indigenous name of medicine and translation of meaning. (3) Place of production and geographic distribution of medicine. (4) Relative importance, prevalence of use and availability of the plant.

Page 5: Methods for ethnopharmacological field work

143

(5) Plant part(s) and other medicinal plants used in preparation. (6) Vernacular terms for the substance’s therapeutic properties. (7) Antiquity of use of substance (opinion of informants).

(II) Collection and storage (1) Method of propagation, if cultivated. (2) Period of plant’s optimum potency. (3) Time of year and day plant is gathered and its stage of growth. (4) Criteria whereby potency is ascertained (smell, color of leaves). (6) Special conditions as to who collects the plant and where. (6) Ritual prayers and offerings associated with collecting. (7) The manner in which the plant drug is dried and stored.

(III) Preparation of plant drug (1) Place of preparation. (2) Personnel who prepares dose. (3) Mode of preparation (infusion, decoction). Complete description of

techniques used, with drawings if possible. (4) Dosage of plant drug or plant mixture employed in units of local

measure (vernacular terms) and equivalents in international system of weights and measures.

(Iv) Drug therapy (1) (2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

Who diagnoses state of illness. Diagnostic criteria for illness (agent or mechanism, prodromal, symp- tomatic; etiological (“how”) and incidental (“why”) concepts. Description of illness treated. Vernacular names of pathological states. Not all illnesses found in the non-Western world correspond to or are readily translatable into Western biomedical categories (Glick, 1967; Fabrega, 1972; Simons and Hughes, 1985). Consequently, the in- vestigator should record the native category and the specific phenomenological symptoms and visible signs subsumed under the indigenous illness category. Description of substances and therapeutic techniques using observed case, if possible. By means of notes, sketches and drawings describe in precise detail the sequence of events in the drug treatment, the dis- position of the patient, the individuals in attendance and the duration of treatment phases. Afterwards obtain patient’s testimony regarding efficacy of treatment and eventual evaluation by medical practitioner of the patient’s condition. Route of administration: external (poultice, ointment), internal (astringents, diuretics and other medicines). Sexual, dietary or other plant drug restrictions associated with use of herbal remedy. Alternate medicinal plants used when drug plant is not available.

Page 6: Methods for ethnopharmacological field work

144

(8) Contra-indications, their ascribed causes and the remedial measures taken.

(9) Rituals, incantations and prayers associated with drug use; the plant’s use in other ceremonies.

(V) Sociocul tural context (1) Social restrictions (age, sex, class) of drug use. (2) Ritual sanctions (past or current) which prohibit the substance to

certain individuals. (3) Symbolic significance of plant (sex, life, death, sentiment). (4) Religious beliefs, myths, tales, proverbs and popular sayings associated

with the plant.

(VI) Accessory documentation (1) Photographs of medicinal plant and use. (2) Voucher specimen of plant. (3) Sample of plant drug (part utilized). (4) Missing data which will be collected in a subsequent inquiry.

Collection of botanical voucher specimens

Since the collection of herbarium specimens is covered extensively in the literature only a general description and useful suggestions based on per- sonal field experience will be given. For more detailed descriptions of collecting botanical specimens see Johnston (1939), Franks (1965), De Wolf (1968), Smith (1971) Knudsen (1972), Radford et al. (1974) and the biblio- graphy. Steenis (1950) and Fosberg and Sachet (1965) treat plant collecting procedures peculiar to tropical regions.

Well-made voucher specimens are essential for botanical identification and to authenticate statements made about the plant. For any extended work a plant press is indispensable, although if the investigator collects only a few specimens these may be moistened with an alcohol-formaldehyde solution, wrapped in wet or glazed paper, placed in a plastic bag and forwarded immediately so they reach their destination in a fresh state.

A portable plant press may be obtained through a biological supply house or easily constructed with two pieces of 0.60 cm thick plywood (33 x 47 cm) with grain running lengthwise, cleats, copper rivets and washers or short box nails. The field press consists of the two frames and alternating layers of double-face corrugated cardboard or aluminum sheets (31 x 45 cm); driers made of deadening felt or heavy blotting paper and bibulous newspaper sheets (40 x 60cm) containing the specimen. The paper sheets containing the plants are placed in a pile of alternating driers and ventilators and subjected between the two boards to a pressure of 15-30 lb, applied by two buckled, web cargo straps 2 cm in width, and so regulated as neither to crush the tender parts of the specimens nor to allow the leaves to wrinkle in

Page 7: Methods for ethnopharmacological field work

145

drying. For working under rigorous field conditions it is advisable to construct a sturdy canvas cover for the field press and handles for easy carrying.

The plant to be pressed should be average in appearance and comprising all plant parts including open flowers, fruits, leaves, root or other under- ground part. It is usually best to collect two or more duplicates of each specimen in case one becomes spoiled and so as to have sufficient material for identification and integration into various herbaria. In addition, some countries demand, as part of permit requirements, duplicates of the speci- mens collected deposited at local scientific institutions.

Immediately upon collecting, the specimen is spread out in a natural condition and carefully placed between the newspaper sheet in the plant press, without crumpling the flowers or the leaves going beyond the limits of the paper. At least some of the leaves are reversed, so as to display the lower surface. Some of the flowers should be face-down and others pressed face-up in order to show both surfaces of the corolla; the petals being carefully opened to their natural position. The leaves and flowers of plants with thick stems can receive very little direct pressure, resulting in wrinkled plant parts. This may be remedied by thinning the back of the stem with a knife or by placing a cotton-batting pad on top of the newspaper, which distributes the pressure more evenly. If a plant is too large several sheets may be prepared or the plant bent at a sharp angle, while still flexible, in the shape of an inverted V, N or M. The paper is then folded over, the press closed and the straps tightened.

Fungi, cacti, bulbs and fleshy fruits present special problems. After being photographed or after coloured drawings and a spore print have been made, fleshy fungi should be dried as rapidly as possible in a square piece of wire-netting suspended over a kerosene lamp or stove. The specimens are to be kept in paper envelopes or small boxes with some naphthalene or moth balls. Cacti are split open and scraped out before pressing; the flowers being cut longitudinally and the cut surfaces covered with waxed paper. Alter- natively, cacti and thick, fleshy plants may be photographed, then immersed in alcohol or scalded in water and dried without pressing. Fleshy fruits may be kept in leak proof, screw cap bottles of liquid preservative or split with a knife and dried but accompanied by photographs wherever possible. Smaller fruits are dried in the open air, enclosed in envelopes, and placed in the folded papers with the specimens of the plant.

The plant press is set upright in a warm, dry area where a strong breeze or sufficient air may be circulated through the ventilators. The more rapidly the plants are dried, the better. Until the plants feel warm and crisp to the touch, the newsprint and driers must be changed daily, especially during the first few days, and the wet driers laid out in the sun or near a fire during the rainy season. If a large number of specimens are to be collected the plants are transferred, after having been in the field press overnight, to a heavier drying press. The specimens are first examined to see that they are lying

Page 8: Methods for ethnopharmacological field work

146

straight, not wrinkled or the flowers covered by leaves. The folds of paper, containing the rearranged plants, are then stacked, alternatively, with driers or ventilators between each folded paper and the press frame tigh- tened as taut as possible with buckle and straps. In a wet climate the plants must be dried artificially, with the press lying vertically on top of a screen or wire netting-covered drying box (16 x 2.5 ft), containing several lanterns or one or more flat or round-wick kerosene stoves (Fosberg and Sachet, 1965).

For storage and shipping the folds of paper containing the dried speci- mens are packed, 7-10 cm thick, between two sheets of stiff cardboard and tightly tied with heavy twine. The bundles are then wrapped in heavy, waterproof paper with some moth flakes or crystals. For shipping by mail, the wrapped packages are packed in cardboard cartons or wooden packing cases lined with waterproof paper and several handfuls of naphthalene or paradichlorbenzine.

Collecting permits from the responsible government departments and scientific institutions of the host country must be obtained in advance. The limitations, regulations and requirements for collecting vary greatly from country to country. In addition, copies of regulations and permits for export/import must be obtained from the host country as well as port of entry. The researcher should know the procedures for complying with both

TABLE 1

FIELD EQUIPMENT

Collecting equipment

Plant press Driers Ventilators Newsprint Collecting bottles Cord Felt-pointed markers Folding pocket knife Formaldehyde Good grade plastic or rubber-lined canvas (military laundry) bags for field storage of

specimens Knapsacks for collecting Insecticide Liquid preservative - formalin-ascetic acid-alcohol (FAA) Notebook Printed labels Small kerosene stove or lantern Small manila coin envelopes - for collecting seeds, flowers, etc. Small paint brush Trowl and small pick String marking tags for labelling

Page 9: Methods for ethnopharmacological field work

147

before he ventures into the field. In general, dried plant material which is accompanied by a fairly detailed listing of contents is not subject to quarantine.

In Table 1, a list of suggested basic equipment is provided. All equipment should be tested before going into the field. Camping equipment and medical supplies are not included. It is inadvisable to expect to procure any equip ment in the country to be visited, unless it is ascertained in advance that these items can be obtained there. Even newspapers, for example, are by no means easy to find in remote regions of many countries, including the United States.

Collecting material in bulk for chemical analysis

Concentrations of drugs in plants and, consequently, their bioactive potency varies according to source and handling, the plant part, the age of the plant and ecological factors such as neighboring plant species, seasonality, diurnal changes in light, climatic and soil conditions. In ad- dition, dry material is not as active as fresh material. To obtain the best results from chemical analysis of the plants collected, it is important to handle them properly, seeing that the plants are not mixed with some other material of similar appearance and collected at the right time of the year. Leaves should be collected when the plant is in flower, in clear, dry weather and in the morning after the dew has dried. The large woody stems of herbs are removed and discarded. Flowers should be collected immediately upon opening; seeds are gathered as soon as they have ripened (Sofowora, 1982). Bulbs and roots should be gathered when the leaves of the plant are falling off; the outer coat of the bulbs are removed and sliced in half before drying. Due to the cost and time involved in returning to the collecting site, sufficient material (lo-200 kg) should be gathered.

Before transport, plant material must be well dried so as to impede insect infestation, the growth of molds and fungi and to facilitate the transit of the plant material through customs. Since light and temperature accelerate catalytic reactions and may even destroy some plant hormones, material for biological and phytochemical analysis is best dried in a shaded area. In the hot tropics, drying in the sun on a concrete or metal surface or by means of a fire or stove results in overheating and undesired chemical changes. In drying, the plant material is spread out thinly for a few days on a clean floor in an attic or house, covered with a wire screen, and stirred occasionally until thoroughly dry.

Smaller amounts of dried material may be transported in paper, cloth or polyethylene bags and leak-proof, screw cap plastic jars. Large jute or burlap bags, such as coffee sacks, are equally serviceable although large ziplock plastic bags may be preferable in order to keep down shipping costs. With plastic bags the plant material must be completely dried since these receptacles facilitate rotting whereas air freely circulates in cloth bags,

Page 10: Methods for ethnopharmacological field work

148

evaporating any residual moisture. Since they induce chemical changes, the plant material should not be treated with ordinary insecticides such as naphthalene, mercuric chloride or formaldehyde. In order to kill insects and inhibit fungi and mold formations, a small amount of alcohol is added and the plastic bag is sealed or the bag tied with rope. Alcohol produces little chemical changes in the plant material and initial chemical extractions in the laboratory are made by means of alcohol. It is advisable to make previous arrangements with an institution or individual so that shipments are given proper attention upon receival.

Chemical screening

Simple field tests by which the presence of alkaloids and other groups of substances can be detected have been developed (Farnsworth, 1966). Such tests greatly facilitate subsequent laboratory screening by providing in- dications for research chemists as to what to look for. For example, if a plant is used as a hallucinogen by a certain group, a spot test should most likely indicate the presence of an alkaloid. The presence of alkaloids may be rapidly tested with a minimum of equipment: Dragendorg regents, ethanol, ammonia solution, alcohol, acetic acid, test tube, Petri dish and filter paper (Raffauf, 1962). Yet even a carefully conducted alkaloid assay in the field may fail to detect the presence of quaternary alkaloids and some groups of substances, such as steroids and flavonoids, require equipment and facili- ties at present impractical for rigorous tropical forest conditions. Marini- Bettblo et al. (1981) have amply described a transportable field kit for the screening of a number of chemical groups including alkaloids, anthranoids, tannins and saponins. Since the construction and use of such a kit requires considerable expertise in the procuring and handling of chemical materials, the field screening of plants can only be recommended to properly trained personnel.

Acknowledgements

Financial support for field work which aided in the development of this paper is gratefully acknowledged from the National Science Foundation, the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, the Mar-strand Foundation and the New School for Social Research. The author greatly appreciates the guidance and unfailing assistance of Dr. Richard E. Schul- tes, Harvard University and Dr. Robert F. Raffauf, Northeastern Uni- versity.

References

Archer, W.A. (1945a) Vanishing Plant Lore. National Horticultural Magazine 24, 109-414. Archer, W.A. (1945b) Collecting data and specimens for the study of economic plants. U.S.

Department of Agriculture Miscellaneous Publications 568, l-52.

Page 11: Methods for ethnopharmacological field work

149

Barrau, J., An Ethnobotanical Guide for Anthropological Reseamh in Malayo-Oceania. UNESCO: Sciences Cooperation Office for South-East Asia, Bangkok-Djakarta, mimeo- graph, n.d.

Becker, H.S. (1958) Problems of inference and proof in participant observation, American Sociological Review 23, 652-660.

Boiteau, P. (1976) Grille Documentaire d’Ethnopharmacologie. In: L. Bouquiaux and J.M.C. Thomas (Eds.), Eru@te et Description des Langues a Tmdition Orate, Vol. 3, SELAF, Paris, pp. 835-839.

Boiteau, P. and Potier, P. (1976) The urgent search for medicinal plants. CNRS Research 3, 3339.

Cast&&, E.F. (1944) The Domain of Ethnobiology. American Naturalist 78, 158-170. Co&ran, W.C. and Cornfield, J. (1951) Modern methods in the sampling of human populations.

American Journal of Public Health 41, 647-661. Coville, F.V. (1895) Directions for collecting specimens and information illustrating the

aboriginal uses of plants. U.S. National Museum Bulletin No. 39, Part J, p. 7. Croom, E.M. (1983) Documenting and evaluating herbal remedies. Economic Botany 37, 13-27. De Wolf, G.P. (1968) Notes on making an herbarium. Arnotifia 28,69-111. Fabrega, H. (1972) The study of disease in relation to culture. Behavioral Science 17, 183-203. Farnsworth, N.R. (1966) Biological and Phytochemical Screening of Plants, Journal of Phar-

maceutical Science 55, 225-276. Fosberg, F.R. (1939) Plant Collecting Manual for Field Anthropologists, American Fiber-Velope

Mfg. Co., Philadelphia, PA. Fosberg, F.R. (1960) Plant collecting as an anthropological field method. El PaZacio 67,

125-139. Fosberg, F.R. and Sachet, M.-H. (1965) Manual for Tropical Herbaria, Regnum Vegetabile 39,

Utrecht, p. 44. Frankel, O.H. and Bennet, E. (Eds.) (1970) Genetic Resources in Plants - Their Rxplomtion and

Conservation, I.B.P. Handbook, F.A. Davis Co., Philadelphia, PA. Franks, J.W. (1965) A Guide to Herbarium Practice, Handbook for Museum Curators, Part E,

Sec. 3, The Museums Assoc., London. Friedberg-Berthe, C., Questionnaires Ethnobotaniques, in L. Bouquiaux and J.M.C. Thomas

,(Eds.) (1976) Enqu&!e et Description des Langues d 7kadition Omle, Vol. 3, SELAF, Paris, pp. 695-697.

Gilmore, M.R. (1932) The importance of ethnobotanical investigation. American Anth- ropologist 34, 326-327.

Glick, L.B. (1967) Medicine as an ethnographic category: the Gimi of the New Guinea Highlands. Ethnology 6, 31-56.

Glock, C.Y. (Ed.) (1967) Survey Research in the Social Sciences. Russell Sage Foundation, New York.

Hernandez, X. (1971) Apuntes Sobre la Ezplomcion Etnobotanica y su Metodologia. Est. Nat. Agric., Chapingo, Mexico.

Johnston, I.M. (1939) !l’he Prepamtion of botanical specimens for the Herbarium, Arnold Arboretum, Jamaica Plains, MA.

Johnston, T.F. (1977) Auditory driving, hallucinogens, and music-color synesthesia in Tsonga ritual. In: B.M. du Toit (Ed.), Drugs, Rituals and Altered States of Consciousness. A.A. Balkema, Amsterdam, pp. 215-236.

Junker, B.H. (1960) Field Work: an Introduction to the Social Sciences. Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Kluckhohn, F.R. (1940j The participant-observer technique in small communities. American Journal of Sociology 46, 331343.

Knudsen, J.W. (1972) Collecting and pnskoing Plants and Animals. Harper and Row, New York.

Lawrence, G.H.M. (1951) Taxonomy of Vascular Plants. Macmillan Co., New York, pp. 234-243.

Page 12: Methods for ethnopharmacological field work

150

Marini-Bettolo, G.B., Nicoletti, M. and Patamia, M. (1981) Plant screening by chemical and chromatographic procedures under field conditions, Journal of Chromatography 213, 113 127.

Martin, M. (1974) Understanding and participant observation in cultural and social anth- ropology. In: M. Truzzi (Ed.), Verstchcn: Subjective understanding in the Social Sciences. Addison-Wesley, London, pp. 102-134.

MiehIer, E.G. (1986) Research Interviewing: Context and Narrative. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA.

Pike, K.L. (1971) Phonemics: A Technique for Reducing Languages to Writing. Univ. of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI.

Radford, A.E., Dickison, W.C., Massey, J.R. and Bell, C.R. (1974) Vascular Plant Systematics. Harper and Row, New York, pp. 387-398.

Raffauf, R.A. (1962) A simple field test for alkaloid-containing plants. Economic Botany 16, 171-172.

Robbins, W.R., Harrington, J.P. and Freire-Marreco, B. (1916) Ethnobotany of the Tewa Indians. U.S. Bwvau of American Ethnology Bulletin 55, l-2, pp. l-6.

Samarin, W.J. (1967) Field Linguistics. A Guide to Linguistic Field Work, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.

Schultes, R.E. (1947) The use of formaldehyde in plant collecting. Rhodora 49, 54-60. Schwartz, MS. and Schwartz, C.G. (1955) Problems in participant observation. American

Journal of Sociology 60, 343-354. Simons, R.C. and C.C. Hughes (Eds.), (1985) The Cultww-Bound Syndromes: Folk Zllnesses of

Psychiatric and Anthropological Interest. D. Reidel, Dordrecht. Smith, C.E. (1971) Preparing herbarium specimens of vascular plants, Agriculture Information

Bulletin No. 348, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. Sofowora, A. (1982) Medicinal Plants and !Daditional Medicine in Africa. John Wiley and

Sons, Ltd., Chichester, p. 59. Steenis, C.G.G.J. van, (1950) The Technique of plant collecting and preservation. In: M.J. van

Steenis-Kruseman (Ed.), Flora Malesiana, Vol. 1, Walters-Noordhoff Publ., Groningen, pp. XLV-LXIX.

Sturtevant, W.C. (1969) Guide to Field Collecting of Ethnographic Specimens. Smithsonian Institution Information Lflt. No. 503, Washington, DC.

Train, P., Henrichs, J.R. and Archer, W.A. (1941) Medicinal Uses of Plants by Indian Tribes of Nevada, Co&. toward a Flora of Nevada, No. 33, U.S. Dept. Agriculture, Washington, DC, p. 6-7.

Van den Berg, M. (1984) Ver-O-Peso: the Ethnobotany of an Amazonian Market, Advances in Econqmic Botany 1, 140-149.

Wasson, R.G., Cowan, G., Cowan F. and Rhodes, W. (1974) Maria Sabina and Her Mazatec Mushroom Veladu, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, London.

Young, F.W. and Young, R.C. (1961) Key informant reliability in rural Mexican villages. Human Organization 20, 141-148.