↓ Skip to main content

Use patterns, use values and management of Afzelia africana Sm. in Burkina Faso: implications for species domestication and sustainable conservation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 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
Use patterns, use values and management of Afzelia africana Sm. in Burkina Faso: implications for species domestication and sustainable conservation
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13002-018-0221-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Larba Hubert Balima, Blandine Marie Ivette Nacoulma, Marius Rodrigue Mensah Ekué, François N’Guessan Kouamé, Adjima Thiombiano

Abstract

The lack of literature on the interactions between indigenous people and the valuable agroforestry trees hinder the promotion of sustainable management of plant resources in West African Sahel. This study aimed at assessing local uses and management of Afzelia africana Sm. in Burkina Faso, as a prerequisite to address issues of domestication and sustainable conservation. One thousand forty-four peoples of seven dominant ethnic groups were questioned in 11 villages through 221 semi-structured focus group interviews. The surveys encompassed several rural communities living around six protected areas along the species distribution range. Questions refer mainly to vernacular names of A. africana, locals' motivations to conserve the species, the uses, management practices and local ecological knowledge on the species. Citation frequency was calculated for each response item of each questionnaire section to obtain quantitative data. The quantitative data were then submitted to comparison tests and multivariate statistics in R program. A. africana is a locally well-known tree described as a refuge of invisible spirits. Due to this mystery and its multipurpose uses, A. africana is conserved within the agroforestry systems. The species is widely and mostly used as fodder (87.55%), drugs (75.93%), fetish or sanctuary (70.95%), food (41.49%), and raw material for carpentry (36.19%) and construction (7.05%). While the uses as fodder, food and construction involved one organ, the leaves and wood respectively, the medicinal use was the most diversified. All tree organs were traditionally used in 10 medical prescriptions to cure about 20 diseases. The species use values differed between ethnic groups with lower values within the Dagara and Fulani. The findings reveal a total absence of specific management practices such as assisted natural regeneration, seeding, or transplantation of A. africana sapling. However, trees were permanently pruned and debarked by local people. Harvesting of barks mostly contributed to the decline of the species populations. Local people acknowledged declining populations of A. africana with lower densities within the agroecosystems. They also perceived between individuals, variations in the traits of barks, leaves, fruits and seeds. Significant differences were found between ethnic groups and gender regarding the species uses. Local knowledge on the species distribution differed between ethnic groups. This study showed the multipurpose uses of A. africana throughout Burkina Faso. The results provide relevant social and ecological indicators to all stakeholders and constitute a springboard towards the species domestication and the elaboration of efficient sustainable conservation plans.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 141 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 15%
Researcher 17 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 20 14%
Unknown 44 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 21%
Environmental Science 23 16%
Social Sciences 9 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 2%
Other 23 16%
Unknown 50 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 14 November 2023.
All research outputs
#3,792,989
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#131
of 737 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,692
of 330,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 737 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
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 330,191 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.