↓ Skip to main content

Bird naming systems by Akan people in Ghana follow scientific nomenclature with potentials for conservation monitoring

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Bird naming systems by Akan people in Ghana follow scientific nomenclature with potentials for conservation monitoring
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13002-015-0062-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Justus P. Deikumah, Vida Asieduwaa Konadu, Richard Kwafo

Abstract

Studies on indigenous knowledge of fauna particular birds and its potential use in biodiversity conservation and management are rare globally. Characteristics used in creating indigenous bird names in many Ghanaian languages are undocumented. The main aim of this study is to answer the question "whether indigenous bird naming systems by the Akan tribes in Ghana follow scientific nomenclature and whether indigenous Akan bird knowledge can potentially help improve bird conservation efforts in Ghana. Purposive sampling technique was employed in selecting 10 respondents from 25 communities in the five administrative districts in the Central Region. The study was conducted between November 2014 and March 2015. A mixed method approach was adopted in the data collection including key person interviews, focus group discussion, and structured interview supported by a participatory field observation. Indigenous people in the study area have reported 143 species of birds belonging to 44 families representing 57 % of total number of species with known local names in Ghana. The study revealed that just as Latin and common English naming systems, indigenous Akan bird names originated from features of the bird, including plumage, vocalizations or behavioural characteristics and belief systems of the indigenous people. The study also discovered that indigenous people in the study area have distinct names for different species within a particular family for most of the birds they could identify. However, they occasionally assign a single general name for either the entire family or all species therein. The study found evidence to support the prediction that indigenous bird naming systems in the Akan language follow scientific nomenclature. Indigenous knowledge and understanding of birds in the study area can be tapped and used in conservation planning and monitoring of birds. This research thus provides sufficient evidence to prove that indigenous knowledge by the Akan tribes in the study area can be useful in bird conservation and monitoring programs in Ghana. Further research in other Ghanaian languages is recommended.

Twitter Demographics

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters 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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 4%
Unknown 51 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 8 15%
Unspecified 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Student > Master 5 9%
Other 13 25%
Unknown 9 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 10 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 15%
Social Sciences 7 13%
Unspecified 6 11%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 14 26%
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 14 April 2019.
All research outputs
#14,521,948
of 24,495,755 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#451
of 765 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,309
of 289,820 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#8
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,495,755 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 765 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 289,820 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.