↓ Skip to main content

Swiss ethnoveterinary knowledge on medicinal plants – a within-country comparison of Italian speaking regions with north-western German speaking regions

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Swiss ethnoveterinary knowledge on medicinal plants – a within-country comparison of Italian speaking regions with north-western German speaking regions
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13002-016-0106-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria Mayer, Mirjam Zbinden, Christan R. Vogl, Silvia Ivemeyer, Beat Meier, Michele Amorena, Ariane Maeschli, Matthias Hamburger, Michael Walkenhorst

Abstract

Ethnoveterinary knowledge in Europe may play an important role as a basis for sustainable treatment options for livestock. Aims of our study were (a) to compare the ethnoveterinary practices of two culturally and sociodemographically different regions of Switzerland, (b) to compare results with earlier ethnoveterinary studies conducted in Switzerland and in adjacent Italian regions and, (c) to evaluate possible reasons for regional differences in European ethnoveterinary medicine. 25 interviews were conducted in 2014 in all Italian speaking regions (ItR) of Switzerland, and 31 interviews were held in five north-western German speaking Cantons (GeC). Semi-structured questionnaires were used to collect detailed information regarding plant species, mode of preparation, dosage, route of administration, category of use, origin of knowledge, frequency of use, and satisfaction with outcomes of the treatments. A total of 162 homemade remedies in ItR and 219 in GeC were reported, out of which 125 and 145, respectively, were reported to contain only one plant species (homemade single species herbal remedy report, HSHR). 44 ItR and 43 GeC plant species were reported to treat livestock, of which only a half were used in both regions. For each HSHR, we classified the treatment intention of all use reports (UR), leading to a total of 205 and 219 UR in ItR and GeC respectively. While cattle were the most often treated livestock species in both study regions, in ItR 40% of UR were administered to small ruminants. Main indications in both regions were gastrointestinal diseases and skin afflictions, but in ItR a high number of URs were reported as antiparasitics. URs were mainly handed down from the past generation, but in GeC the source of knowledge for 20% of URs were from courses. Regarding the used plant species, ItR showed a higher concordance with Swiss than Italian studies, but with some differences to all regions. A total of 22 (14 ItR; 8 GeC) plant species in this study have not been reported before in ethnoveterinary studies of Swiss and Italian alpine regions. ItR and GeC, show differences and similarities with respect to their own ethnoveterinary practices and earlier Swiss and Italian ethnoveterinary studies. Linguistic, geographical, as well as social and farm-structural conditions influence the regional ethnoveterinary knowledge. However, political borders seem to be more important than language or geographical barriers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 13%
Researcher 8 11%
Professor 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 24 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 26%
Environmental Science 7 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 6%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 26 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 January 2017.
All research outputs
#15,416,191
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#515
of 736 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,817
of 421,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#10
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 736 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,214 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.