↓ Skip to main content

Animals and their products utilized as medicines by the inhabitants surrounding the Ranthambhore National Park, India

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, November 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 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
Animals and their products utilized as medicines by the inhabitants surrounding the Ranthambhore National Park, India
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, November 2006
DOI 10.1186/1746-4269-2-46
Pubmed ID
Authors

Madan Mohan Mahawar, DP Jaroli

Abstract

The present ethnozoological study describes the traditional knowledge related to the use of different animals and animal-derived products as medicines by the inhabitants of villages surrounding the Ranthambhore National Park of India (Bawaria, Mogya, Meena), which is well known for its very rich biodiversity. The field survey was conducted from May to July 2005 by performing interviews through structured questionnaires with 24 informants (16 men and 8 women), who provided information regarding therapeutic uses of animals. A total of 15 animals and animal products were recorded and they are used for different ethnomedical purposes, including tuberculosis, asthma, paralysis, jaundice, earache, constipation, weakness, snake poisoning. The zootherapeutic knowledge was mostly based on domestic animals, but some protected species like the collared dove (Streptopelia sp.), hard shelled turtle (Kachuga tentoria), sambhar (Cervus unicolor) were also mentioned as important medicinal resources. We would suggest that this kind of neglected traditional knowledge should be included into the strategies of conservation and management of faunistic resources in the investigated area.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 87 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 15%
Researcher 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Student > Master 9 10%
Student > Postgraduate 8 9%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 20 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 32%
Environmental Science 9 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 8%
Social Sciences 6 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 21 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 May 2021.
All research outputs
#14,644,496
of 24,689,476 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#455
of 767 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,731
of 82,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,689,476 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 767 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 82,357 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.