4.7 Article

Amazonian Brazilian medicinal plants described by CFP von Martius in the 19th century

期刊

JOURNAL OF ETHNOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 147, 期 1, 页码 180-189

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2013.02.030

关键词

CFP von Martius; Medicinal plants; Amazon; Historical records; Brazil

资金

  1. CNPq
  2. FAPEMIG
  3. PRPq-UFMG
  4. FAPESP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ethnopharmacological relevance: Information regarding the use of beneficial, native Brazilian plants was compiled by European naturalists during the 19th century. The German botanist C.F.P. von Martius was one of the most prominent naturalists and described the use of several Brazilian plants. Aim of the study: To present data on Amazonian medicinal plants documented by von Martius in his books. Materials and methods: Data on Amazonian medicinal plants were obtained from three books published by von Martius. Traditional information about these plants was translated from Latin and the cited plant species reorganised according to current taxonomic criteria. Correlated pharmacological studies were obtained from different scientific databases. Results: A total of 92 native medicinal species from the Amazon were recorded in von Martius' books. These accounts described 117 different medical uses for these plants. Several parts of the plants were used, including many exudates. The principal use of the species recorded was the treatment of dermatological problems, followed by gastro-intestinal, urinary and respiratory disorders. Few species were recorded as purgatives and febrifuges, a result that differs from the observations of other naturalists. The efficacy of the recorded traditional uses has been confirmed for the few species that have been subjected to laboratory studies. Conclusion: The data recorded by the German naturalist von Martius represent a rich, unexplored source of information about the traditional uses of Brazilian plants. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据