Does access to natural environments explain differences in the use of wild plants between rural and urban populations?

keywords: Ecological indices, Protected areas, Wild edible plants, Wild medicinal plants, urban ethnobotany


Background: The use of wild plants depends on a number of sociocultural and ecological factors, such as the ease of access to natural environments. This limitation for urban inhabitants leads to differences in the knowledge and use of wild plants compared to rural inhabitants.

Hypothesis:  Rural and urban populations tend to share a similar knowledge of plants and use similar plants species when easy access to natural landscapes is available.

Study site and years of study: Rural and urban area of Curarrehue, Araucanía region (southern Chile), 2017.

Methods: The use patterns of wild edible plants (WEPs) and wild medicinal plants (WMPs) were compared between the rural and urban population of Curarrehue. We evaluated the number of WEPs and WMPs collected, their richness and diversity, the most important gathering environments and the way in which knowledge was acquired.

Results: No differences were observed in the use of wild plants between the populations, except for the richness of WMPs. The WEPs were gathered mainly from the forest by both populations, and in the case of the WMPs, from forest and disturbed areas. The knowledge was acquired mainly through relatives, collecting plants from forest areas.

Conclusions: Access to natural environments is key to preserving traditional practices and contributes to reducing gaps in the knowledge and use of wild plants between local rural and urban populations.


Download data is not yet available.
Does access to natural environments explain differences in the use of wild plants between rural and urban populations?


Agil R., Gilbert C., Tavakoli H., Hosseinian F. 2015. Redefining Unusable Weeds to Beneficial Plants: Purslane as a Powerful Source of Omega-3 for the Future. Journal of Food Research 4(6): 39-47. DOI:

Ahmad J., Malik A. A., Shakya L. 2013. Urban development: A threat to wild species of medicinal and aromatic plants. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 13(7): 947-951. DOI:

Albuquerque U. P., Lucena R. F. P. 2005. Can appearance affect the use of plants by local people in tropical forests? Interciencia 30(8): 506-511.

Bakkali F., Averbeck S., Averbeck D., Idaomar M. 2008. Biological effects of essential oils. Food and Chemical Toxicology 46(2): 446-475. DOI:

Barreau A., Ibarra J. T., Wyndham F. S., Rojas A., Kozak R. A. 2016. How can we teach our children if we cannot access the forest? Generational change in Mapuche knowledge of wild edible plants in Andean temperate ecosystems of Chile. Journal of Ethnobiology 36(2): 412-432. DOI:

Begossi A. 1996. Use of ecological methods in ethnobotany: Diversity indices. Economic Botany 50: 280-289. DOI:

Bennett B. C., Prance G. T. 2000. Introduced Plants in the Indigenous Pharmacopoeia of Northern South America. Economic Botany 54: 90-102. DOI:

Berkes F. 2003. Rethinking Community-Based Conservation. Conservation Biology 18(3): 621-30. DOI:

Bharucha Z., Pretty J. 2010. The roles and values of wild foods in agricultural systems. Philosophical Transactions B 365(1554): 2913-2926. DOI:

Bonet MA., Vallès J. 2002. Use of non-crop food vascular plants in Montseny biosphere reserve (Catalonia, Iberian Peninsula). International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition 53(3): 225-248. DOI:

Bortolotto I. M., Amorozo M. C. D. M, Neto G. G., Oldeland J., Damasceno-Junior G. A. 2015. Knowledge and use of wild edible plants in rural communities along Paraguay
River, Pantanal, Brazil. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 11:46. DOI: 10.1186/s13002-015-0026-2

Caniago I., Siebert S. F. 1998. Medicinal plant ecology, knowledge and conservation in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Economic Botany 52: 229-250. DOI:

Cordero S, Abello L, Galvez F. 2017. Plantas silvestres comestibles de Chile y otras partes del mundo. Chile: Corporación Chilena de la Madera. ISBN: 978-956-8398-10-1

Cunningham AB. 2001. Applied ethnobotany. People, wild plant use and conservation. London: Earthscan. ISBN: 1-85383-697-4

Delbanco A. S., Burgess N. D., Cuni-Sanchez A. 2017. Medicinal Plant Trade in Northern Kenya: Economic Importance, Uses, and Origin. Economic Botany 71: 13-31. DOI:

Deokate U. A., Khadabadi S. S. 2012. Phytopharmacological aspects of Salacia chinensis. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytotherapy 4: 1-5. DOI:

Díaz-Betancourt M., Ghermandi L., Ladio A., López-Moreno I. R., Raffaele E., Rapoport E. H. 1999. Weeds as a source for human consumption. A comparison between tropical and temperate Latin American. Revista de Biología Tropical 47: 329-338.

Emery MR., Hurley PT. 2016. Ethnobiology in the city: embracing the urban ecological moment. Journal of Ethnobiology 36: 807-819. DOI:

Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. 2017. (10 Aug 2017).

Frei B., Sticher O., Heinrich M. 2000. Zapotec and mixe use of tropical habitats for securing medicinal plants in Mexico. Economic Botany 54: 73-81. DOI:

Goddard MA., Dougill AJ., Benton TG. 2009. Scaling up from gardens: biodiversity conservation in urban environments. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 25: 90-98. DOI:

Guil-Guerrero JL. 2001. Nutritional composition of Plantago species (P. major L., P. lanceolata L., and P. media L.). Ecology of Food and Nutrition 40: 481-495. DOI:

Hammer O., Harper DAT., Ryan PD. 2001. PAST: Paleontological Statistics Software Package for Education and Data Analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica 4: 1-9.

Hsieh TC., Ma KK., Chao A. 2016. iNEXT: a R package for rarefaction and extrapolation of species diversity (Hill numbers). Methods in Ecology and Evolution 7:1451-1456. DOI:

INE. Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas. 2017. Accessed 10 Apr 2017.

Joos-Vandewalle S. 2015. The effects of urbanisation on non-timber forest product dependencies. MSc thesis, University of Cape Town.

Kalwij JM. 2012. Review of ‘The Plant List, a working list of all plant species’. Journal of Vegetal Science 23: 998-1002. DOI:

Kujawska M., ?uczaj ?. 2015. Wild Edible Plants Used by the Polish Community in Misiones, Argentina. Human Ecology 43: 855-869. DOI:

Ladio A., Lozada M., Weigandt M. 2007. Comparison of traditional wild plant knowledge between aboriginal communities inhabiting arid and forest environments in Patagonia, Argentina. Journal of Arid Environments 69: 695-715. DOI:

McCarter J., Gavin MC. 2015. Assessing variation and diversity of ethnomedical knowledge: a case study from Malekula Island, Vanuatu. Economic Botany 69: 251-261. DOI:

McLain RJ., Hurley PT., Emery MR., Poe MR. 2014. Gathering ‘‘Wild’’ food in the city: rethinking the role of foraging in urban ecosystem planning and management. Local Environment 19: 220-240. DOI:

MMA. 2011. Las áreas protegidas de Chile. Antecedentes, Institucionalidad, Estadísticas y Desafíos. Accessed 10 Apr 2017.

Molina M., Tardío J., Aceituno-Mata L., Morales R., Reyes-García V., Pardo-De-Santayana M. 2014. Weeds and food diversity: natural yield assessment and future alternatives for traditionally consumed wild vegetables. Journal of Ethnobiology 34: 44-67. DOI:

Moore N., Hamza N., Berke B., Umar A. 2017. News from Tartary: an ethnopharmacological approach to drug and therapeutic discovery. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 83: 33-37. DOI:

Myers N., Mittermeier RA., Mittermeier CG., da Fonseca G., Kent J. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature: 403: 853-858. DOI:

Ohmagari K., Berkes F. 1997. Transmission of indigenous knowledge and bush skills among the western James Bay Cree women of Subarctic Canada. Human Ecology 25: 197-222. DOI:

Pardo de Santayana M., Tardío J,. Blanco E., Carvalho AM., Lastra JJ., San Miguel E., et. al. 2017. Traditional knowledge of wild edible plants used in the northwest of the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal): a comparative study. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 3:27. DOI:

Pereira C., Barros L., Carvalho A., and Ferreira ICFR. 2011. Nutritional composition and bioactive properties of commonly consumed wild greens: potential sources for new trends in modern diets. Food Research International. 44: 2634-2640. DOI:

Pilgrim SE., Cullen LC., Smith DJ., Pretty J. 2008. Ecological knowledge is lost in wealthier communities and countries. Environmental Science & Technology 42: 1004-1009. DOI:

PLADECO. Plan de Desarrollo Comunal. 2009. Accessed 10 Apr 2017.

Poe MR., McLain RJ., Emery M., Hurley PT. 2013. Urban forest justice and the rights to wild foods, medicines, and materials in the city. Human Ecology 41: 409-422. DOI:

R Development Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.

Rajbhandary S., Ranjitkar S. 2006. Herbal drugs and pharmacognosy: monographs on commercially important medicinal plants of Nepal. Kathmandu: Ethnobotanical society of Nepal. ISBN: 9994698915

Rana JC., Pradheep K., Chaurasia OP., Sood S., Sharma RM., Singh A., Negi R. 2012. Genetic resources of wild edible plants and their uses among tribal communities of cold arid region of India. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 59: 135-149. DOI:

Rapoport EH., Marzocca A., Drausal B. 2009. Malezas comestibles del Cono Sur y otras partes del planeta. Argentina: Ediciones Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria. ISBN: 9789872505097

Romojaro A., Botella M., Obón C., Pretel M. 2013. Nutritional and antioxidant properties of wild edible plants and their use as potential ingredients in the modern diet. International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition 64: 944-952. DOI:

Sánchez-Mata MC., Loera RDC., Morales P., Fernández-Ruiz V., Cámara M., Marqués CD., et. al. 2012. Wild vegetables of the Mediterranean area as valuable sources of bioactive compounds. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 59: 431-443. DOI:

Saslis-Lagoudakis CH., Rønsted N., Clarke AC., Hawkins JA. 2015. Evolutionary approaches to ethnobiology. In: Albuquerque U, De Medeiros P, Casas A, editors. Evolutionary ethnobiology. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing pp. 59-72. DOI:

Schulp CJE., Thuiller W., Verburg PH. 2014. Wild food in Europe: A synthesis of knowledge and data of terrestrial wild food as an ecosystem service. Ecological Economics 105: 292-305. DOI:

Setalaphruk C., Price LL. 2007. Children’s traditional ecological knowledge of wild food resources: a case study in a rural village in Northeast Thailand. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 3: 33. DOI:

Simkova K., Polesny Z. 2015. Ethnobotanical review of wild edible plants used in the Czech Republic. Journal of Applied Botany and Food Quality 67: 49-67. DOI:

Sogbohossou OE., Achigan-Dako EG., Komlan FA., Ahanchede A. 2015. Diversity and differential utilization of Amaranthus spp. along the urban-rural continuum of Southern Benin. Economic Botany 69: 9-25. DOI:

Somnasang P., Moreno-Black G. 2000. Knowing, gathering and eating: knowledge and attitudes about wild food in an Isan village in Northeastern Thailand. Journal of Ethnobiology. 20: 197-216.

Stepp JR. and Moerman DE. 2001. The Importance of weeds in ethnopharmacology. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 75: 19-23. DOI:

Stepp JR. 2004. The role of weeds as sources of pharmaceuticals. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 92: 163-166. DOI:

Tardío J. 2010. Spring is coming: the gathering and consumption of wild vegetables in Spain. In: Pardo de Santayana M, Pieroni A., Puri R, editors. Ethnobotany in the New Europe: people, health and wild plant resources. UK: Berghahn Press pp. 211-238.

Teklehaymanot T., Giday M., Medhin G., Mekonnen Y. 2007. Knowledge and use of medicinal plants by people around Debre Libanos monastery in Ethiopia. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 111: 271-283. DOI:

Toledo B., Galetto L., Colantonio S. 2009. Ethnobotanical knowledge in rural communities of Cordoba (Argentina): the importance of cultural and biogeographical factors. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 5: 40. DOI:

Turan M., Kordali S., Zengin H., Dursun A., Sezen Y. 2010. Macro and micro mineral content of some wild edible leaves consumed in Eastern Anatolia. Acta Agriculturae
Scandinavica Section B-Soil And Plant Science 53: 129-137. DOI:

Turner NJ., ?uczaj ?., Migriorini P., Pieroni A., Dreon AL., Sacchetti L., et. al. 2011. Edible and tended wild plants, traditional ecological knowledge and agroecology. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 30: 198-225. DOI:

Turreira-García N., Theilade I., Meilby H., Sørensen M. 2015. Wild edible plant knowledge, distribution and transmission: a case study of the Achí Mayans of Guatemala. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 11: 52. DOI:

Vianna LP. 2008. De invisíveis a protagonistas: populações tradicionais e unidades de conservação. Brazil: Annablume. ISBN: 8574198528

Voeks RA. 1996. Tropical forest healers and habitat preference. Economic Botany 50: 381-400. DOI:

Williams N., Hahs AK., Vesk PA. 2014. Urbanization, plant traits and the composition of urban floras. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 17: 78-86. DOI:

World Health Organization. 2008. Fact sheet on traditional medicine. Accessed 10 Apr 2017

Zank S., Hanazaki N. 2012. Exploring the links between ethnobotany, local therapeutic practices, and protected areas in Santa Catarina Coastline, Brazil. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2012: 563-570 DOI:

Zarger RK. 2002. Acquisition and transmission of subsistence knowledge by Q’eqchi’ Maya in Belize. In: Stepp J.R., Wyndham F.S., and Zarger R.K. (eds.). Ethnobiological biocultural divers. University of Georgia Press, USA, pp. 593-603.
How to Cite
CorderoS., GálvezF., ArenasJ., & Rodríguez ValenzuelaE. (2020). Does access to natural environments explain differences in the use of wild plants between rural and urban populations?. Botanical Sciences, 99(1), 104-123.