↓ Skip to main content

Ethnobotanical survey of plants used in Afyonkarahisar-Turkey

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 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
Ethnobotanical survey of plants used in Afyonkarahisar-Turkey
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13002-015-0067-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Süleyman Arı, Mehmet Temel, Mustafa Kargıoğlu, Muhsin Konuk

Abstract

The traditional knowledge about plants and their uses in Turkey is disappearing in recent years because the new generations of villagers migrate to big cities for a better life. Afyonkarahisar located at the intersection of roads and phytogeographical regions (Mediterranean, Iran-Turan, and Euro-Siberian) has more than 2500 plant species. This richness of plant diversity promotes the indigenous commuity for the traditional use of wild plants. The aim of the study is to show wild plants' ethnobotanical usages associated with medicinal, food, fodder, and household goods in 31 settlements within the boundaries of Afyonkarahisar province. The ethnobotanical data were collected from 46 informants by means of semi-structured interviews from 2012 to 2014. Ethnobotanical uses of plants of the study area were conducted in the vicinity of Afyonkarahisar (5 districts, 8 towns, 15 villages, and 3 neighborhood centers). One hundred and thirty plant taxa belonging to 39 families were recorded and collected. Hundred and seventy-eight different uses of these plants were documented and used generally for medicinal (84), food (68), fodder (16), household goods (3), dyes (3), handicrafts (3) and religious (1). This study provides interesting uses of plants in the local community of Afyonkarahisar and its surrounding area, in what purpose they make use of plants, how they make use of them and obtained results will contribute to economy of villagers. Since the local people, especially in villages, are poor and do not have health care, they use the plants to treat illnesses, food, fodder, household goods and other uses (evil eye). Also this study will light the way for posterity for next generations.

Twitter Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Turkey 1 1%
Unknown 78 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 15%
Researcher 11 14%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 11%
Other 17 22%
Unknown 9 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 28%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 15 19%
Environmental Science 5 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 14 18%

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 25 December 2015.
All research outputs
#16,899,533
of 20,957,071 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#581
of 703 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,155
of 400,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#54
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,957,071 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 703 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 400,032 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.