Skip to main content

Medicinal plants sold at traditional markets in southern Ecuador



The traditional markets in southern Ecuador and within the Andean region are especially important for plant resource trading among local people, even since before Spanish colonization; therefore, ethnobotanical studies are currently necessary and important. These strategic spaces persist for the traditional medicine cultural value reflected in the higher consumption of medicinal plants, which span all socioeconomic levels of rural and urban people. The purpose of this study includes the following: 1) to create a novel list of medicinal plants sold at 33 traditional markets; 2) to establish medicinal plant use agreement amongst vendors with the Factor of Informant Consensus (FIC); and 3) to determine the most sold medicinal plant species using the Fidelity Level (FL).


This study focus on traditional markets ethnobotany utilizes the largest sample of medicinal plants market vendors up to date in Ecuador, interviewing them at 33 traditional markets, located within the Loja province. In order to determine the most sold medicinal plants and their ethnobotanical information, structured questionnaires and personal conversations were conducted with 196 medicinal plant vendors, and voucher specimens were created. Agreement among vendors about the therapeutic use of medicinal plants was measured using the FIC, and the most sold medicinal plant species were assessed with the FL.

Results and discussion

This research registered 160 medicinal plant species, grouped in 126 genera and 57 families that were sold in 33 traditional markets. The uses of medicinal plants in southern Ecuador are related to a long history of traditional medicine health practices that has persisted until today as well as high plant diversity. The 53 therapeutic uses recorded were grouped into 12 medical categories that were adapted from the World Health Organization. Three medical categories shared the highest value for FIC = 0.92, which showed a high level of agreement of market vendors for 57 medicinal plant species sold to treat ailments related with digestive, dermatological, and sensorial systems. The FL index determined 11 culturally important medicinal plant species based on the reported uses by 40 or more market vendors. Two medicinal plant species had an FL = 100 %, Matricaria recutita and Gaiadendrum punctatum, used to treat digestive and respiratory systems ailments.


In the Loja province, people continue to consume medicinal plant species sold at local markets to treat somatic and/or psychosomatic health ailments because sociocultural customs are strongly expressed in ancestral practices of wellbeing. When the largest values of FL (60.5 %–100 %) and FIC (0.81–0.92) indexes are combined, they demonstrated agreement among 196 market vendors in the use of seven medicinal plant species that were most sold for the 12 medical categories. This study stresses how important public policies are for the trade and quality of medicinal plant resources, particularly for local people practicing auto-medication. Reasons for the maintenance of traditional markets in southern Ecuador include lower cost of medicinal plants, confidence in traditional medicine, and/or sociocultural environment. In Ecuador, the sustainable management of wild medicinal plants diversity, particularly the most sold, is crucial for its conservation in nature.


Traditional markets around the world have been recognized as places for the trade of plants and their derivative products and have become exchange posts where cultures are expressed through regional trade [111]. Additionally, markets are a meeting place to display a diverse array of minerals, animals, and plants sold locally, which come from neighboring communities that are culturally and ecologically diverse [4, 12]. In this way, literature on traditional markets and traded medicinal plant species with their value chain flows requires more attention from scientists, because ethnobotanical information is rather scarce.

Current ethnobotanical research at traditional markets across continents, considering Asia, Africa, Oceania, and Latin America, contributes to the understanding of plant diversity through the trade of medicinal plant species and their cultural value [1345]. In this way, market surveys can help to understand regional networks of producers, sellers, healers, and consumers by the supply and demand of medicinal plants and their derivative products [4]. The total number of inventoried medicinal plant species at a particular traditional market is important, but they do not necessarily represent all species used in the traditional medicine of a specific human group [5, 8].

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), the wellbeing of 80 % of the population in developing countries depends mostly on the use of medicinal plants through traditional medicine, spiritual therapies, and ancestral healing practices [46]. This fact is particularly evident in the ancestral practices of traditional communities living in rural areas. In Latin America, ethnobotanical studies of traditional markets and their history are needed, because the trade of medicinal plants and their derived products has local, national, regional, and international importance, especially given their growing demand [15, 47]. In the Andean-Amazonian region including Ecuador, traditional markets existed before Spanish colonization [48]. Throughout the Spanish conquest, a new kind of market appeared within public areas named “tiánguez” for the exchange of goods; they were also strategic points for bartering, conversation, and the sharing of life experiences [47, 48].

For the Andean region, published studies of traditional markets that emphasize ethnobotanical aspects have been conducted in Venezuela [11], Colombia [18], Bolivia [19, 43], Peru [4979], and Ecuador [80]. Within Ecuador, it is estimated that 273 medicinal plants species were sold in the herb stalls (“puestos de hierbas”) of corresponding traditional markets, which were located at six provincial capitals in the Andean and Amazonian regions [80]. These capital cities, represented by Ambato, Quito, Riobamba, Nueva Loja, Puyo, and Tena, are the main points of trade for medicinal plants and their derivatives; from these places, commerce routes begin to spread throughout the country [81, 82].

More studies are needed to investigate the medicinal plants sold in Ecuadorian markets [8085] to determine which medicinal plant species are most sold and how these are related to local health disorders. This is particularly true for the southern region of the country and specifically for the Loja province, because although it is a region rich in plant diversity, it is a region that is deficient in traditional market studies. In this area, only a few ethnobotanical surveys have been conducted, particularly on how the “mestizo” population and indigenous communities use medicinal plant resources from wild collection and/or homegardens [9, 52, 8689].

Nowadays, even basic inventoried information accounting for the origins of medicinal plant resources and quantities of fresh and/or dry material sold is lacking as well as consumers’ usage of these products. Studies of traditional markets are necessary in Ecuador, because large gaps in knowledge on flora trade persist. This research at Loja province includes the following objectives: 1) to create a novel list of medicinal plants sold at 33 traditional markets; 2) to establish medicinal plants use agreement amongst vendors with the Factor of Informant Consensus (FIC) [90]; and 3) to determine the most sold medicinal plant species using the Fidelity Level (FL) [91].


Study area

The study was carried out in 33 traditional markets within the Loja province, situated in southern Ecuador, between 3°19’56”S to 4°44’36”S latitude and 79°04’28”W to 80°29’03”W longitude (Fig. 1). This region occupies 11.042 km2, which is 4 % of the national territory, and borders to the south with Peru [92]. The total population of the province in 2010 was 448,966 inhabitants, consisting of 96.3 % “mestizo” Spanish speakers, and 3.7 % Saraguro indigenous people, who speak the Spanish and Kichwa languages [93].

Fig. 1

Location of 33 traditional markets within the Loja province, southern Ecuador

The Loja province has abundant hydrographic features, like rivers that flow into the Pacific catchments basin. The province is dominated by the Andean mountain range, which gives rise to a very irregular topography, and altitudes between 120 and 3800 m. This region shows considerable variation in local climate, with conditions represented by tropical dry to the west, subtropical humid in the central area, and cold humid at the east [92].


Medicinal plants were sold at 15 established markets and 18 open markets located in 13 of the 16 cities in Loja province (Fig. 1). The established market, known locally as “mercado”, includes from five to ten subsectors; the most frequent of these include the following: personal use items, electronic equipment, groceries, cooked foods, dairy products, meat products, legumes, fruits, and fresh or dry raw medicinal plants. Besides the main established markets, open markets occur weekly and are known locally as “feria libre”. Vendors at open markets are rural harvesters and/or small retailers who sell medicinal plants, fresh local products such as cheese, legumes, fruits, and vegetables; they commerce hens and guinea pigs.

A variety of actors were involved in the sale of medicinal plants at the studied markets. The majority of these actors included rural harvesters, small retailers, formal, and informal vendors (Table 1). The criteria applied to determine the types of each vendor in a market was based on how they auto-recognized their own role. The medicinal plant vendor in each market was essentially a person who used a specific know-how to trade bunches of medicinal plants, because each one is well familiarized with the therapeutic applications of every plant species sold. It is important to clarify that all interviewed vendors were just sellers and not healers.

Table 1 Kinds of vendors of medicinal plants and their role in traditional markets at Loja province

Structured ethnobotanical questionnaires

Surveys of medicinal plants sold at 15 established markets and 18 open markets were conducted in the selected 13 cities within the Loja province between 2007 and 2013. During the visits, the first author carried out interviews with a total of 196 market vendors. After explaining the aim of the study, all vendors of medicinal plants from the 33 traditional markets were asked to participate in the research. The interviewed vendors were eighteen years or older; also, they were “mestizos” (95 %) and Saraguro indigenous people (5 %), and the large majority consisted of women (97 %).

Medicinal plants were bought from each vendor, and interviews were structured as ethnobotanical questionnaires in Spanish, being conducted by the main author with the 196 market vendors. In the field research, the first author respected the vendors who preferred to remain anonymous. The questionnaires aimed to record the specimens’ information on the following: vernacular names, medicinal uses, plant morphological structures sold, and therapeutic prescriptions. All the vendors who decided to collaborate were interviewed according to mutually agreed conditions and under Ecuador’s rights, especially with regards to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CDB) [94].

This research was conducted according to the code of ethics of the International Society for Ethnobiology (ISE) [95], which is also endorsed by the Society for Economic Botany (SEB). The Principle of Respect, numbered 9 in the code, recognizes the necessity for researchers to respect the integrity, morality, and spirituality of the culture, traditions, and relationships of indigenous people, traditional societies, and local communities within their worlds.

Voucher collection and nomenclature

The nomenclature of plant families, genera, and species follows the Catalogue of Vascular Plants of Ecuador [96]. It was also compared to the TROPICOS database [97]. The 160 species were identified using the available volumes of the Flora of Ecuador [98101] and reference material in the herbaria of the “Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja” (HUTPL) and “Universidad Nacional de Loja” (LOJA). The specimens were registered under the collection series FT (Fani Tinitana), and vouchers were deposited at HUTPL. The collection of botanical specimens sold in the 33 traditional markets authorized the Ecuadorian Ministry of the Environment (Ministerio del Ambiente del Ecuador N° 001-2013-IC-FLO-DPAP-MAE).

Quantitative analysis

All the local therapeutic uses of medicinal plants were grouped in 12 medical categories (Table 2), which were adapted from the catalogue of International Classification of Diseases made by the WHO [102]. In this research, each category proposed by the WHO allows grouping and systematizing the data related to ‘illness’ and ‘disease’ as well as to compare the results among other regional and international studies related to the markets’ ethnobotany [102, 103]. Additionally, WHO recognizes in each medical category the health practice systems of traditional populations [46]. In this study, ‘illness’ refers to being ill as conceived from a sociocultural personal perception, while ‘disease’ was considered from the biomedical perspective [104].

Table 2 Therapeutic uses of medicinal plants to treat local ailments at Loja province

Information recorded in the structured ethnobotanical questionnaires related to the collected 160 taxa and their medicinal uses were recorded into a data matrix for quantitative analysis. The FIC index was used to measure consensus among vendors regarding the therapeutic use of each medicinal plant [106111]; it shows the level of homogeneity among information provided by different vendors. The FIC was calculated according to the following formula: FIC = (Nur – Nt)/(Nur – 1), where Nur refers to the number of therapeutic use reports, grouped in a medical category, from market vendors for a particular medicinal plant, and Nt refers to the total number of medicinal plant species used in a particular medical category [90, 106, 107]. The FIC values range between 0 and 1, where 1 indicates the highest level of market vendor consensus.

The relative healing potential of each reported medicinal plant sold at 33 traditional markets was evaluated with the FL index [91112]. This indicates the percentage of vendors claiming the use of a certain medicinal plant for the same therapeutic use, which was grouped in a specific medical category [113, 114]. The FL was calculated according to the following formula: FL (%) = (Ip × 100/Iu), where Ip is the number of market vendors who independently claim a therapeutic use of a medicinal plant species to treat a specific illness or disease, and Iu is the total number of market vendors that sold the same medicinal plant to treat any given illness or disease.

Results and discussion

Medicinal plants sold at traditional markets

This research registered 160 medicinal plant species traded in 33 traditional markets within the Loja province, which were grouped in 123 genera and 57 vascular plant families (Table 5.). In traditional markets at La Paz (Bolivia) and Cusco (Peru), a total of 129 [19] and 152 [117] medicinal plant species were respectively reported; in contrast, 400 plant species were recorded in Trujillo and Chiclayo (Peru) [22]. When compared to these previous studies, the number of medicinal plant species sold in markets within the Loja province represents an intermediate value.

The dominant plant family was Asteraceae with 19 species that represented 11.8 % of the total species, followed by 16 species of Lamiaceae (10 %), 8 species of Piperaceae (5 %) and Pteridacea (5 %), 7 species of Amaranthaceae (4.4 %) and Solanaceae (4.4 %), 6 species of Onagraceae (3.8 %), and 5 species of Rosaceae (3.1 %) (Fig. 2). Other studies of Andean highland traditional markets also recorded Asteraceae as the family with the highest number of medicinal plant species, and Solanaceae and Lamiaceae were consistently among the most frequent families [11, 43, 117].

Fig. 2

Dominant medicinal plant families recorded in 33 traditional markets within the Loja province, southern Ecuador

The most frequent medicinal plant life forms were herbs (61.1 %) and shrubs (32.2 %), followed by trees (5.5 %) and lianas (1.2 %). This data was similar to results from other studies of highland markets in Bolivia [19] and Peru [117], where the herb habit represents a large percentage due to its random occurrence, high diversity, and endemism. Herbs such as weeds, which were abundantly available in relation to other plant life forms, are an important source of food and remedies [118]. This is because they contain one or more bioactive principles and a wide variety of highly active secondary metabolic compounds [119], making these plants potentially more effective for medicinal applications [120].

Geographic status of medicinal plant species sold at traditional markets

The medicinal plants native to Ecuador belonged to 92 species (57.5 %) [82, 86, 88] and were brought to traditional markets from mountain forests, cloud forests, scrub vegetation, and the Andean paramo [121, 122]. Of the 160 species, 6 (3.8 %) were endemic to Ecuador highlands [123], corresponding to the families Asclepiadaceae (Orthosia ellemanniae), Asteraceae (Achyro clinehallii, Aequatorium jamesonii and Aristeguietia persicifolia), and Onagraceae (Fuchsia harlingii and Fuchsia loxensis), whereas 62 species (38.7 %) were introduced from different regions of the world. In relation to the role of humans in the management of medicinal plant species, the material sold in the studied traditional markets belonged to homegardens (cultivation) and natural vegetation (wild).

The five most sold medicinal plant species were very well known by vendors for their therapeutic uses and health properties. These were Aerva saguinolenta, Equisetum bogotense, Matricaria recutita, Oreocallis grandiflora, and Ruta graveolens. The trade of these five taxa was linked to the treatment of the most common illnesses and diseases present within the Loja province, related to the respiratory system, genitourinary system, digestive system, and culture-bound syndromes (e.g. “evil eye”, “evil air”, “frights”, and “calor encerrado”). It is important to stress that Matricaria recutita and Ruta graveolens are widely traded and used throughout South America and the Old World [19, 62, 124], because of their magical and medicinal qualities for the preparation of remedies used in therapies of soul and body.

The five plant species most commonly used in medicinal beverages, locally known as “horchata” (herbal mixture tea) and “agua aromática” (herbal tea), were native and cultivated [96]. These were Aloysia triphylla, Amaranthus hybridus, Pelargonium graveolens, Equisetum bogotense, and Oreocallis grandiflora. The availability of these plant species was firstly revealed by their spatial accessibility, explained by their wide spread distribution and cultivation; secondly, it was explicated by their seasonal stock and the quantities of plant material sold throughout the year. Similarly to Venezuela, Peru, and Bolivia, these plant species are used individually or in herbal mixtures infusions [11, 19, 65], especially to treat different kinds of afflictions related to the nervous, digestive, and genitourinary systems.

Vernacular names of medicinal plant species traded in Loja province

A total of 204 vernacular names were recorded for the 160 medicinal plant species; 59.4 % of the species had at least one name, 36.1 % had two names and 4.5 % had three names. Most of the vernacular names used to identify each plant were in Spanish, followed by a few in Kichwa language from the Andean highlands. The name given to the whole plant is the same name given to the plant’s morphological structure. In the case of gathering wild plant species belonging to the Malva genus or cultivated hybrids of the Fuchsia genus, the vendors recognized all the species in the genus with the same vernacular name.

The vernacular names of the medicinal plants compiled in this study were compared to others from previous studies conducted at other traditional markets in Bolivia [19], Peru [22, 77], and Ecuador [83] as well as ethnobotanical surveys in the Andean highlands [125] and Spain [124]. The most common five medicinal plant species that share the same cosmopolitan vernacular names were Dysphania ambrosioides (“paico”), Equisetum giganteum (“cola de caballo”), Matricaria recutita (“manzanilla”), Melissa officinalis (“toronjil”), and Rosmarinus officinalis (“romero”).

Medicinal plants: morphological structures and therapeutic administration

The therapeutic administration recommended by the market vendors revealed the 13 kinds of medicinal plant morphological structures sold, where each one was used to treat a human organ and/or fluid. The most frequently traded morphological structures were branches for 44 medicinal plant species (27.5 %), followed by leaves (25.6 %), flowers (16.9 %), and plants without roots (16.9 %). The less frequently sold morphological structures, available only at 18 open markets, were bark, fruit, inflorescence, latex, seed, stem, style, root, and wood.

The research identified 20 modes of therapeutic administration (Table 5): 14 were prepared using fresh plant material sold at 18 open markets, and six used dried plant material sold at 15 established markets. Oral was the most frequent mode of therapeutic administration (83.8 %), prepared with fresh and/or dry plants, especially in a drink locally known as “bajeada”. Compared to other Andean markets, oral infusions have similar preparations in Bolivia [19] and Cuzco [117].

Other therapeutic administrations were rubbing (16.9 %), topical applications (8.7 %), hot baths after childbirth (5.6 %), and cleaning wounds (5 %). The majority of the prescribed medicinal plants given to patients by vendors were applied without any standardized doses. Only a few elder vendors made warnings about adverse side effects of some medicinal plants, but they never mentioned antidotes. The six most common orally administered medicinal plant species were Aerva sanguinolenta, Amaranthus hybridus, Equisetum bogotense, Matricaria recutita, Melissa officinalis, and Oreocallis grandiflora.

The therapeutic administration, locally known with the term “zumo”, generally refers to the extract of a plant morphological structure or fruit pure juice, thus differentiating “zumo” from “jugo” (juice); the latter is associated with the fruit diluted in an amount of water [104]. The five most popular medicinal plant species sold for “zumo” were Aerva sanguinolenta (plant without root), Cardamine bonariensis (plant without root), Peperomia blanda (plant without root), Tradescantia zebrina (leave), and Verbena litoralis (branch).

Factor of Informant Consensus (FIC)

In studies related to medicinal plants, the FIC index provides a measure of reliability for the specified statement of evidence regarding the agreement amongst a specific human group [90, 126]. The 160 medicinal plants sold in 33 traditional markets to treat different human ailments were classified into 12 medical categories, with a FIC value assigned to each (Table 3). Three medical categories shared the highest value for FIC = 0.92, which showed a high level of agreement amongst the 196 vendors for 57 medicinal plant species sold to treat the digestive, dermatological, and sensorial systems.

Table 3 Medical categories and Factor of Informant Consensus among vendors of traditional markets at Loja province

The digestive system has the highest value of used citations by 437 market vendors, who report 37 medicinal plant species. This is related to a high incidence of gastrointestinal ailments in southern Ecuador [86, 127], which may also be associated to stomach cancer, as this is the second most important cause of mortality in the country [128]. When comparing the large FIC values obtained in this study for the digestive system to the most important medical categories reported in previous surveys worldwide [113, 115, 116, 129], the results reveal the importance of medicinal plant species in treating ailments of the digestive system, such as gastric complaints and abdominal pains.

Additionally, therapeutic uses related with the other two medical categories, culture-bound syndromes and general disorders, had relatively high values of use citations by market vendors. The medicinal plant species responsible for this particular status was Ruta graveolens, used to treat seven psychosomatic complaints, and Equisetum bogotense, used in five common ailments. As it was confirmed by participative observation, local people believe that these two medicinal plant species were efficient in the treatment of 12 particular local ailments, revealing the persistence of cultural believes syndromes and the necessity of preventive medicine to avoid common ailments.

Even the lowest FIC values registered in this study, which included hormonal system (0.81), musculoskeletal system (0.83), and gynecological system (0.85), are large when compared to other studies that use this same index [106, 107, 110, 111, 130]. These low FIC values show a low agreement amongst medicinal plant market vendors, specifically in the trade of medicinal plant species associated to the treatment of the symptoms related to these ailments. This data contrasts with the results of a market study in Venezuela [30], where a FIC = 0.91 was registered for the gynecological system, as obtained with 25 interviewed market vendors.

The FIC values between 0.81 and 0.92 demonstrate the strong levels of consensus amongst 196 vendors in the multiple uses of the 160 medicinal plant species sold. Incidentally, even when the taxa number prescribed for a specific illness or disease varied, the majority of the 33 traditional markets had a common pool of regional flora sold to clients within the 12 medical categories. As in Bolivia [19] and Peru [125], the most common medicinal plant species sold were for symptoms related to the digestive system, nervous system, respiratory system, and genitourinary system.

Fidelity Level (FL)

The FL index determined 11 culturally important medicinal plant species in the local population of the Loja province (Table 4), as based on the reported uses by 40 or more market vendors to treat 53 illnesses and diseases grouped in 12 medical categories. It was also useful for highlighting the most important species sold in each medical category. In this analysis, the 160 medicinal plant species mentioned by market vendors were considered, and the FL was calculated for each one. A FL of 100 % for a specific medicinal plant species indicates that all of the plant use reports mentioned the same therapeutic administrations to treat an illness or disease.

Table 4 Most used medicinal plants species for medical categories based on highest fidelity level at Loja province

Two medicinal plant species had a FL = 100 %, Matricaria recutita and Gaiadendrum punctatum, because they were used consistently for ailments in the digestive system and respiratory system, respectively. This may be due to their greater efficacy in alleviating symptoms and the persistence of ancestral wisdom beliefs in the local population. These two species have considerable agreement amongst market vendors on their particular use and credibility and therefore could be further analyzed for developing pharmafood or pharmaceutical products.

The market vendors had a tendency to rely on 11 medicinal plant species to treat ailments related to nine medical categories. The most important seven had an FL > 60 % and represented Matricaria recutita, Gaiadendron punctatum, Ruta graveolens, Melissa officinalis, Equisetum bogotense, Amaranthus hybridus, and Viola tricolor. All these medicinal plant species should be studied to determine the efficacy and safety of all local reported medical uses and also evaluated by phytochemical and pharmacological tests as well as bioactivity essays and toxicity studies.


Within the Loja province, people continue to use traditional medicine by consuming particular medicinal plant species sold at local markets. This also shows that sociocultural customs are strongly expressed in ancestral practices of wellbeing. Proof of the former was found by analyzing responses from 196 vendors who sold 160 fresh or dried medicinal plant species material to treat a wide spectrum of illnesses and diseases. The plant resources functioned as palliatives or, in some cases, curatives to both somatic and psychosomatic health afflictions. Nowadays in Ecuador, all stake-holders related with dynamics of traditional markets networks (e.g., all kinds of vendors and local people), who are frequently using medicinal plants require detailed research for a safety and serious use.

In the case of culture-bound syndromes plus complications with a diversity of systems such as digestive, sensorial, dermatological, respiratory, genitourinary and/or nervous, there are usually no precise therapeutical prescriptions. The separation between illnesses and diseases is very small, especially with regards to what the therapeutic administration and medical treatment should be. An example is the Ruta graveolens based-remedy, which is used to relieve “evil eye”, “evil air”, “frights”, and “calor encerrado” plus menstrual disorders.

The agreement among 196 market vendors in the use of seven specific most sold medicinal plant species for the 12 medical categories is fairly high, especially when the largest values of FL (60.5 %–100 %) and FIC (0.81–0.92) indexes are combined. A total of seven plant species with a high FL value for treating gastro-intestinal diseases are under investigation for their pharmacological properties by the Applied Chemical Department of the UTPL research team.

For future efforts, it should be important to focus on correlating the values of FL and FIC with the incidence of local ailments, as this will be useful to establish public health policies related with the trade of medicinal plant species. This initiative will be effective to support traditional medicine and its therapeutic repertoire. The first step will be to choose the medicinal plant species with widespread and consistent medicinal use in southern Ecuador and to study their therapeutical applications with physicians and scientists, primarily to identify bioactive compounds.

The evidence presented in this study reaffirms the relationship between ancestral wisdom and traditional medicine, particularly in local markets within the Loja province. In fact, it is important to stress how medicinal plant resources are crucial for local people in 13 cities within the Loja province; also, it is important to understand why a high percentage of them practice auto-medication. Reasons for the maintenance of traditional markets include lower cost of plant products, confidence in traditional medicine, and/or sociocultural environment.

This research is the first contribution to understanding from the ethnobotanical point of view the human-plant dynamics of traditional markets within the Loja province, where medicinal plants have a substantial role in the lives of local people. The trade demand of medicinal plants and their derivatives over the next few years could increase, leading to the over-harvesting of wild plant species and could perhaps even endanger natural populations, (e.g., Oreocallis grandiflora). Sustainable management of wild medicinal plants is important for their diversity conservation and in order to avoid their extinction, particularly in the case of highly used species in traditional medicine.


  1. 1.

    Hooper D, Field H, Dahlgren BE. Useful Plants and Drugs of Iran and Iraq. Volume 9. Chicago: 7 Field Museum of Natural History; 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Linares E, Bye RA. A study of four medicinal plant complexes of Mexico and adjacent United States. J Ethnopharmacol. 1987;19:153–83.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Nicholson MS, Arzeni CB. The market medicinal plants of Monterrey, Nuevo León México. Econ Bot. 1993;47:184–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Martin GJ. Ethnobotany: A Methods Manual, vol. 1. London: Earthscan Publications; 1995.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Cunningham AB. Applied Ethnobotany: People Wild Plant Use and Conservation. People and Plants Conservation. London: Earthscan Publications; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Parente CET, da Rosa MMT. Plantas comercializadas como medicinais no Município de Barra do Piraí, RJ. Rodriguésia. 2001;52(80):47–59.

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Hanlidou E, Karousou R, Kleftoyanni V, Kokkini S. The herbal market of Thessaloniki (N Greece) and its relation to the ethnobotanical tradition. J Ethnopharmacol. 2004;91:281–99.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Williams VL, Witkowski ETF, Balkwill K. The use of incidence-based species richness estimators, species accumulation curves and similarity measure to appraise ethnobotanical inventories from South Africa. Biodivers Conserv. 2007;16:2495–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Williams VL, Balkwill K, Witkowski ETF. Size-class prevalence of bulbous and perennial herbs sold in the Johannesburg medicinal plant markets between 1995 and 2001. South African J Bot. 2007;73:144–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Williams VL, Witkowski ETF, Balkwill K. Volume and financial value of species traded in the medicinal plant market of Gauteng South Africa. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol. 2009;14:584–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Giraldo D, Baquero E, Bermúdez A, Oliveira-Miranda MA. Medicinal plant trade characterization in popular markets of Caracas. Venezuela Acta Bot Venez. 2009;32(2):267–301.

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Silalahi M, Walujo EB, Supriatna J, Mangunwardoyo W. The local knowledge of medicinal plants trader and diversity of medicinal plants in the Kabanjahe traditional market, North Sumatra, Indonesia. J Ethnopharmacol. 2015;175:432–43.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Whitaker TW, Cutler HC. Food plants in a Mexican market. Econ Bot. 1966;20(1):6–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    White A. Hierbas del Ecuador. Quito: Libri Mundi; 1982. p. 379.

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Bye R, Linares E. The role of plants found in the mexican markets and their importance in ethnobotanical studies. J Ethnobiol. 1983;3(1):1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Van den Berg MA. Ver-o-peso: the ethnobotany of an Amazonian market. Adv Econ Bot. 1984;1:140–9.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Bye RA. Medicinal plants of the Sierra Madre: comparative study of Tarahumara and Mexican market plants. Econ Bot. 1986;40(1):103–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Pulido MT, Cavalier J. Comercialización de productos vegetales no maderables en los mercados de Leticia y Florencia, Amazonía colombiana. In: Duivenvoorden JF, Balslev H, Cavalier J, Grandez C, Tuomisoto H, Valencia R, editors. Evaluación de recuros vegetales no maderables en la Amazonía noroccidental. Amsterdam: IBED, Universidad de Amsterdam; 2001. p. 265–310.

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Macía MJ, García E, Vidaurre PJ. An ethnobotanical survey of medicinal plants commercialized in the markets of La Paz and El Alto, Bolivia. J Ethnopharmacol. 2005;97:337–50.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    de Azevedo SKS, Silva IM. Plantas medicinais e de uso religioso comercializadas em mercados e feiras livres no Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil. Acta Bot Bras. 2006;20(1):185–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    van Andel T, Behari–Ramdas J, Havinga R, Groenendijk S. The medicinal plant trade in Suriname. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2007;5:351–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Bussmann RW, Sharon D, Vandebroek I, Jones A, Revene Z. Health for sale: the medicinal plant markets in Trujillo and Chiclayo. Northern Peru J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2007;3(37):1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Albuquerque UP, Monteiro JM, Ramos MA, Cavalcanti de Amorin EL. A pesquisa etnobotánica em mercados e feiras livres. In: Albuquerque UP, Paiva Lucena RF, da Cunha LV FC, editors. Métodos e técnicas na pesquisa etnobotânica. Brasil: Comunigraf Ed Recife; 2008. p. 145–60.

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Lee S, Xiao C, Pei S. Ethnobotanical survey of medicinal plants at periodic markets of Honghe Prefecture in Yunnan Province, SW China. J Ethnopharmacol. 2008;2008(117):362–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Kool A, de Boer HJ, Krüger Å, Rydberg A, Abbad A, Björk L, Martin G. Molecular identification of commercialized medicinal plants in Southern Morocco. PLoS One. 2012;7:e39459.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Leitão F, Leitão SG, Fonseca–Kruel VS, Silva IM, Martins K. Medicinal plants traded in the open–air markets in the State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: An overview on their botanical diversity and toxicological potential. Rev Bras. 2014;24(2):225–47.

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Coelho Ferreira M. Lê marché dês plantes medicinales à Manaus. In La Foret en Jeu: I’ extractivisme en Amazonie centrale. Edited by Laure E. Paris, Francia: UNESCO; 1996:173–177.

  28. 28.

    Puentes JP, Hurrell JA. Plantas andinas y sus productos comercializados con fines medicinales y alimentarios en el Área Metropolitana Buenos Aires-La Plata, Argentina. Bol Latinoam y del Caribe Plantas Med y Aromat. 2015;14:206–236.

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Albuquerque UP, Monteiro JM, Ramos MA, Amorim EL. Medicinal and magic plants from a public market in northeastern Brazil. J Ethnopharmacol. 2007;110:76–91.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Ledezma J, Dávila M, Mondragón A, Castillo MA, Ramírez LA. Registro y conocimiento etnobotánico de plantas medicinales por expendedores de Barquisimeto. Venezuela Boletín del Cent Investig Biológicas. 2007;41(4):531–44.

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Shrestha S. Marketplace plants used in ceremonial cleansing among Andean Qechuans of Ecuador. Virginia, USA: Marshall University; 2007.

  32. 32.

    Bussmann RW, Sharon D, Ly J. From garden to market? The cultivation of native and introduced medicinal plant species in Cajamarca, Peru and implications for habitat conservation. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2008;6:351–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Amiri MS, Joharchi MR. Ethnobotanical investigation of traditional medicinal plants commercialized in the markets of Mashhad, Iran. Avicena J Phytomedicine. 2015;3:254–271.

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Monteiro JM, de Lima AE, Amorim ELC, De Albuquerque UP. Local markets and medicinal plant commerce: a review with emphasis on Brazil. Econ Bot. 2010;64:352–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Lima PGC, Coelho-Ferreira M, Oliveira R. Plantas medicinais em feiras e mercados públicos do Distrito Florestal Sustentável da BR-163, estado do Pará, Brasil. Acta Bot Bras Brasília. 2011;25(2):422–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Van Andel T, Myren B, Van Onselen S. Ghana’s herbal market. J Ethnopharmacol. 2012;140:368–78.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Meléndez M, Alvarado S, de Rojas LC. Identificación y conocimiento de las plantas medicinales expendidas en los mercados principal y libre de Maracay, estado Aragua, Venezuela. Rev Fac Agron (Universidad Cent Venez). 2012;38:64–70.

    Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Ladio AH, Molares S, Ochoa J, Cardoso B. Etnobotánica aplicada en Patagonia: la comercialización de malezas de uso comestible y medicinal en una feria urbana de San Carlos de Bariloche (Río Negro, Argentina). Bol Latinoam Caribe Plantas Med Aromát. 2013;12(1):24–37.

    Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Albuquerque UP, Monteiro JM, Ramos MA, de Amorim ELC, Alves RRN. Ethnobiological Research in Public Markets. Methods Tech Ethnobiol Ethnoecology. 2014;110:367–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Quiroz D, Towns A, Legba SI, Swier J, Brière S, Sosef M, van Andel T. Quantifying the domestic market in herbal medicine in Benin, West Africa. J Ethnopharmacol. 2014;151:1100–8.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Towns AM, Quiroz D, Guinee L, de Boer H, van Andel T. Volume, value and floristic diversity of Gabon's medicinal plant markets. J Ethnopharmacol. 2014;155:1184–93.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Van Andel TR, Croft S, van Loon EE, Quiroz D, Towns AM, Raes N. Prioritizing West African medicinal plants for conservation and sustainable extraction studies based on market surveys and species distribution models. Biol Conserv. 2015;181:173–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Bussmann RW, Paniagua-Zambrana NY, Moya Huanca AL. Dangerous confusion- “Cola de Caballo”-Horsetail, in the Markets of La Paz. Bolivia Econ Bot. 2015;20(10):1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Randriamiharisoa MN, Kuhlman AR, Jeannoda V, Rabarison H, Rakotoarivelo N, Randrianarivony T, Raktoarivony F, Randrianasolo A, Bussmann RW. Medicinal plants sold in the markets of Antananarivo, Madagascar. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2015;11:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Lima PGC, Coelho–Ferreira M, da Silva Santos R. Perspectives on Medicinal Plants in Public Markets across the Amazon: A Review. Econ Bot. 2016;70:64–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    WHO - World Health Organization: Traditional Medicine Strategy 2002–2005. 2002. []. Accessed 15 Oct 2015.

  47. 47.

    Ocampo RA. Situación actual del comercio de plantas medicinales en América Latina. Boletín Latinoam y del Caribe Plantas Med y Aromáticas. 2002;1(4):35–40.

    Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Salomon F. Los señores étnicos de Quito en la época de los Incas. Pendoneros. 1980;10:1–370.

    Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    De Feo V. Medicinal and magical plants in the northern Peruvian Andes. Fitoterapia. 1991;LXIII(5):417–40.

    Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Bussmann RW, Sharon D. Traditional medicinal plant use in Northern Peru: tracking two thousand years of healing culture. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2006;2(47):1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Bussmann R, Sharon D. Plantas de los cuatro vientos, flora mágica y medicinal del Perú. Trujillo-Perú: Graficart srl; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    Bussmann RW, Sharon D. Shadows of the colonial past-diverging plant use in Northern Peru and Southern Ecuador. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2009;5(4):1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    Bussmann RW, Kuhlman A, Glenn A, Meyer K, Rothrock A, Townesmith A, Chait G, Malca G. Phyto-chemical analysis of peruvian medicinal plants - Análisis fitoquímico de plantas medicinales peruanas. Arnaldoa. 2009;16(1):105–10.

    Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Bussmann RW, Sharon D. Markets, healers, vendors, collectors: The sustainability of medicinal plant use in Northern Peru. Mt Res Dev. 2009;29(2):128–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Bussmann RW, Sharon D. Naming a phantom – the quest to find the identity of Ulluchu, an unidentified ceremonial plant of the Moche culture in Northern Peru. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2009;5:8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Bussmann RW, Sharon D, Díaz PD, Barocio Y. Peruvian plants canchalagua (Schkuhria pinnata (Lam.) Kuntze), hercampuri (Gentianella alborosea (Gilg.) Fabris), and corpus way (Gentianella bicolor (Wedd.) J. Pringle) prove to be effective in the treatment of acne. Arnaldoa. 2008;15(1):149–52.

    Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Bussmann RW, Sharon D: From collection to market and cure–an interdisciplinary study of traditional plant use in Northern Peru. In de Albuquerque UP and Hanazaki N (eds) Recent Developments and Case Studies in Ethnobotany. Brazilian Society of Ethnobiology and Ethnoecology and Publication Group of Ecology and Applied Ethnobotany. Recife; 2010

  58. 58.

    Bussmann RW, William L Brown Center’s Global Discovery Program. Markets, Healers, Vendors, Collectors and Modern Applications – Medicinal Plant Use in Northern Peru. Planta Med. 2010;76:S3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    Bussmann RW, Glenn A, Meyer K, Kuhlman A, Townesmith A. Herbal mixtures in traditional medicine in Northern Peru. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2010;6(10):2–11.

    Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Bussmann RW, Glenn A. Cooling the heat - traditional remedies for malaria and fever in Northern Peru. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2010;8:125–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    Bussmann RW, Glenn A, Sharon D. Antibacterial activity of medicinal plants of Northern Peru - Can traditional applications provide leads for modern science? Indian J Tradit Knowl. 2010;9(4):742–53.

    Google Scholar 

  62. 62.

    Bussmann RW, Glenn A, Sharon D. Healing the body and soul: Traditional remedies for “magical” ailments, nervous system and psychosomatic disorders in Northern Peru. African J Pharm Pharmacol. 2010;4(9):580–629.

    Google Scholar 

  63. 63.

    Bussmann RW, Glenn A. Medicinal plants used in northern Peru for reproductive problems and female health. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2010;6:30.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    Bussmann RW, Malca-García G, Glenn A, Sharon D, Chait G, Díaz D, Pourmand B, Jonat B, Somogy S, Guardado G, Aguirre C, Chan R, Meyer K, Rothrock A, Townesmith A, Effio-Carbajal J, Frías-Fernandez F, Benito M. Minimum inhibitory concentration of medicinal plants used in Northern Peru as antibacterial remedies. J Ethnopharmacol. 2010;132(1):101–8.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Bussmann RW, Glenn A. Plants used for the treatment of gastro-intestinal ailments in northern peruvian ethnomedicine. Arnaldoa. 2010;17(2):255–70.

    Google Scholar 

  66. 66.

    Bussmann R, Glenn A. Peruvian medicinal plants for the treatment of liver and gallbladder ailments. Arnaldoa. 2010;17(2):243–53.

    Google Scholar 

  67. 67.

    Bussmann RW, Glenn A. Medicinal plants used in Peru for the treatment of respiratory disorders. Rev Peru Biol. 2011;17(2):331–46.

    Google Scholar 

  68. 68.

    Bussmann RW, Glenn A, Sharon D, Chait G, Díaz D, Pourmand K, Jonat B, Somogy S, Guardado G, Aguirre C, Chan R, Meyer K, Rothrock A, Townesmith A. Proving that traditional knowledge works: The antibacterial activity of Northern Peruvian medicinal plants. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2011;9:67–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. 69.

    Bussmann RW, Glenn A. Fighting pain: Traditional peruvian remedies for the treatment of asthma, rheumatism, arthritis and sore bones. Indian J Tradit Knowl. 2011;10(3):397–412.

    Google Scholar 

  70. 70.

    Bussmann RW, Malca G, Glenn A, Sharon D, Nilsen B, Parris B, Dubose D, Ruiz D, Saleda J, Martínez M, Carillo L, Walker K, Kuhlman A, Townesmith A. Toxicity of medicinal plants used in traditional medicine in Northern Peru. J Ethnopharmacol. 2011;137:121–40.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  71. 71.

    Bussmann RW, Glenn A. Medicinal plants used in northern Peru for the treatment of bacterial and fungal infections and inflammation symptoms. J Med Plants Res. 2011;5(8):1297–304.

    Google Scholar 

  72. 72.

    Bussmann RW. Traditional knowledge for modern ailments – plants used for the treatment of diabetes and cancer in northern Peru. J Med Plants Res. 2011;5(31):6916–30.

    Google Scholar 

  73. 73.

    Bussmann RW, Glenn A. Traditional medicinal plants used in northern Peru for kidney problems and urinary infections. Arnaldoa. 2011;18(1):77–94.

    Google Scholar 

  74. 74.

    Bussmann RW, Glenn A. Mending the heart. Plants used in peruvian ethnomedicine for heart disease, blood pressure irregularities and cholesterol control. Arnaldoa. 2011;18(2):167–78.

    Google Scholar 

  75. 75.

    Bussmann RW, Paniagua-Zambrana N, Rivas Chamorro M, Molina Moreira N, Cuadros Negri MLR, Olivera J. Peril in the market-classification and dosage of species used as anti-diabetics in Lima, Peru. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2013;9(1):37.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  76. 76.

    Bussmann RW. The globalization of traditional medicine in northern Peru: From shamanism to molecules. Evidence-Based Complement Altern Med. 2013;2013:1–46.

    Google Scholar 

  77. 77.

    Bussmann R, Sharon D. Two decades of ethnobotanical research in southern Ecuador and northern Peru. Ethnobiol Conserv. 2014;3:1–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. 78.

    Bussmann RW, Paniagua-Zambrana N, Castañeda Sifuentes RY, Prado Velazco YA, Mandujano J. Health in a pot - The ethnobotany of emolientes and emolienteros in Peru. Econ Bot. 2015;69(1):83–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. 79.

    Azahuanche FP, Rodríguez Avalos F, León Aponte G, Sharon D, Bussmann RW, Willsky GR, Guerrero G, Willner K, Castro Dionicio I. Phytochemical and antibacterial study of medicinal plant mixtures. In search of new components. Pueblo Cont. 2012;23(2):339–44.

    Google Scholar 

  80. 80.

    Cerón Martínez CE. Plantas medicinales de los Andes ecuatorianos. In: Moraes RM, Øllgaard B, Kvist LP, Borchsenius F, Balslev H, editors. Botánica Económica de los Andes Centrales. La Paz: Universidad Mayor de San Andrés; 2006. p. 285–93.

    Google Scholar 

  81. 81.

    Buitrón X. Ecuador: uso y comercio de plantas medicinales, situación actual y aspectos importantes para su conservación. Cambridge: TRAFFIC International; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  82. 82.

    de la Torre L, Navarrete H, Muriel P, Macía MJ, Balslev H. Enciclopedia de las plantas útiles del Ecuador. Quito: Herbario QCA and Herbario AAU; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  83. 83.

    Pustscher J, Vogl C. An ethnobotanical survey on herbal medicine at Quito markets (Ecuador). In Proceedings of the 4th International Congress of Ethnobotany. Edited by Füsün E. Istanbul, Turkey: Ege Yayinlari; 2005:233–239.

  84. 84.

    Naranjo P, Coba JL. Etnomedicina en el Ecuador, vol. 3. Corporación Editora Nacional: Quito; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  85. 85.

    de La Torre L, Muriel P, Balslev H. Etnobotánica en los Andes del Ecuador. In: Moraes RM, Øllgaard B, Kvist LP, Borchsenius F, Balslev H, editors. Botánica Económica de los Andes Centrales. La Paz: Universidad Mayor de San Andrés; 2006. p. 246–67.

    Google Scholar 

  86. 86.

    Bussmann RW, Sharon D. Traditional medicinal plant use in Loja province, southern Ecuador. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2006;2:44.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  87. 87.

    Van den Eynden V. Use and management of edible non-crop plants in southern Ecuador. Ghent: Thesis, Ghent University; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  88. 88.

    Elleman L. Saraguroerne og deres planter—en gruppe højlandsindianeres anvendelse af den naturlige vegetation. Aarhus: Thesis, Aarhus University; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  89. 89.

    Tene V, Malagón O, Finzi PV, Vidari G, Armijos C, Zaragoza T. An ethnobotanical survey of medicinal plants used in Loja and Zamora-Chinchipe, Ecuador. J Ethnopharmacol. 2007;111:63–81.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  90. 90.

    Trotter RT, Logan MH. Informant consensus: A new approach for identifying potencially effective medicinal plants. In: Etkin NL, editor. Plants in Indigenous Medicine and Diet. New York: Redgrave Publishers; 1986. p. 91–112.

    Google Scholar 

  91. 91.

    Friedman J, Yaniv Z, Dafni A, Palewitch D. A preliminary classification of the healing potential of medicinal plants, based on a rational analysis of an ethnopharmacological field survey among Bedouins in the Negev desert. Israel J Ethnopharmacol. 1986;16(2–3):275–87.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  92. 92.

    Cueva Ortiz J, Chalan LA. Cobertura vegetal y uso actual del suelo de la provincia de Loja. Informe Técnico, Naturaleza y Cultura Internacional: Loja; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  93. 93.

    Instituto Nacional de Estadística: Censo de Población y Vivienda del Ecuador. 2010

  94. 94.

    Tapia Paredes JE. Perspectivas para la protección normativa de los conocimientos tradicionales frente al régimen de propiedad intelectual en el comercio internacional. Sede Ecuador, Quito: Thesis, Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  95. 95.

    International Society of Ethnobiology (2006). International Society of Ethnobiology Code of Ethics (with 2008 additions). []

  96. 96.

    Jørgensen PM, León-Yanez S, editors. Catalogue of Vascular Plants of Ecuador. Saint Louis: Monographs in Systematic Botany from the Missouri Botanical Garden; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  97. 97.

    Tropicos. Missouri Botanical Garden plant data base []. Accessed from 05 Jan 2012 to 20 Oct 2012.

  98. 98.

    Harling G, Sparre B (eds.). Flora of Ecuador. Opera Botanica Series B (1–4, 1973–1975; 5–25, 1976–1986). Department of Systematic Botany, University of Göteborg and Botany Section, Riksmuseum, Stockholm; 1973–1986

  99. 99.

    Harling G, Anderson L (eds.). Flora of Ecuador (26–77). Department of Systematic Botany, University of Göteborg, Göteborg; 1987–2006

  100. 100.

    Harling G, Persson C (eds.). Flora of Ecuador (78–87). Department of Systematic Botany, University of Göteborg, Göteborg; 2007–2010

  101. 101.

    Persson C, Ståhl B. Flora of Ecuador (91, 22–26. Göteborg: Botanical Institute, University of Göteborg; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  102. 102.

    International Classification of Diseases. World Health Organization []. Accessed from 20 to 25 Feb 2015. 

  103. 103.

    World Health Organization: International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. In WHO Library Cataloguing. Volume 2. 10th Revision; 2010:39

  104. 104.

    Alexiades MN. Collecting ethnobotanical data: An introduction to basic concepts and techniques. In: Alexiades MN, editor. Selected Guidelines for Ethnobotanical Research. New York: The New York Botanical Garden; 1996. p. 1–57.

    Google Scholar 

  105. 105.

    Rios M, Koziol MJ, Pedersen HB, Granda G. Plantas útiles del Ecuador: aplicaciones, retos y perspectivas/Useful plants of Ecuador: Applications, challenges, and perspectives. Quito: Ediciones Abya-Yala; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  106. 106.

    Heinrich M, Ankli A, Frei B, Weimann C, Sticher O. Medicinal plants in Mexico: Healers’ consensus and cultural importance. Soc Sci Med. 1998;47(11):1859–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  107. 107.

    Gradé JT, Tabuti JRS, Van Damme P. Four footed pharmacists: Indications of self-medicating livestock in Karamoja, Uganda. Econ Bot. 2009;63(1):29–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. 108.

    Ghorbani A, Langenberger G, Feng L, Sauerborn J. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants utilized by Hani ethnicity in Naban River Watershed National Nature Reserve, Yunnan, China. J Ethnopharmacol. 2011;134(3):651–67.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  109. 109.

    Kaval I, Behçet L, Cakilcioglu U. Ethnobotanical study on medicinal plants in Geçitli and its surrounding (Hakkari-Turkey). J Ethnopharmacol. 2014;155(1):171–84.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  110. 110.

    Mahomoodally MF, Muthoorah LD. An ethnopharmacological survey of natural remedies used by the chinese community in Mauritius. Asian Pac J Trop Biomed. 2014;4 Suppl 1:S387–99.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  111. 111.

    Abbet C, Mayor R, Roguet D, Spichiger R, Hamburger M, Potterat O. Ethnobotanical survey on wild alpine food plants in Lower and Central Valais (Switzerland). J Ethnopharmacol. 2014;151(1):624–34.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  112. 112.

    Dembélé U, Lykke AM, Koné Y, Témé B, Kouyaté AM. Use-value and importance of socio-cultural knowledge on Carapa procera trees in the Sudanian zone in Mali. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2015;11:14.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  113. 113.

    Kal E, Asfaw Z, Kelbessa E, Van Damme P. Ethnomedicinal study of plants used for human ailments in Ankober District, north Shewa zone, Amhara Region, Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2013;9:63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  114. 114.

    Song M-J, Kim H, Heldenbrand B, Jeon J, Lee S. Ethnopharmacological survey of medicinal plants in Jeju Island, Korea. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2013;9:48.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  115. 115.

    Quave CL, Pieroni A. A reservoir of ethnobotanical knowledge informs resilient food security and health strategies in the Balkans. Nat Plants. 2015;1:1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  116. 116.

    Mall B, Gauchan DP, Chhetri RB. An ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used by ethnic people in Parbat district of western Nepal. J Ethnopharmacol. 2015;165:103–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. 117.

    Huamantupa I, Cuba M, Urrunaga R, Paz E, Ananya N, Callalli M, Pallqui N, Coasaca H. Riqueza, uso y origen de plantas medicinales expendidas en los mercados de la ciudad del Cusco. Rev Peru Biol. 2011;18(3):283–91.

    Google Scholar 

  118. 118.

    Bye R. The role of humans in the diversification of plants in Mexico. In: Ramamoorthy TP, Bye RA, Lot A, Fa JE, editors. Biological Diversity of Mexico: Origins and Distribution. México: Jardín Botánico del Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; 1993. p. 707–31.

    Google Scholar 

  119. 119.

    Stepp JR. The role of weeds as sources of pharmaceuticals. J Ethnopharmacol. 2004;92(2–3):163–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  120. 120.

    de Albuquerque UP, de Medeiros PM, de Almeida ALS, Monteiro JM, de Freitas Lins Neto EM, de Melo JG, dos Santos JP ALS. Medicinal plants of the caatinga (semi-arid) vegetation of NE Brazil: A quantitative approach. J Ethnopharmacol. 2007;114(3):325–54.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  121. 121.

    Aguirre Z, Madsen JE, Cotton E, Balslev H. Botánica austroecuatoriana: estudios sobre los recursos vegetales en las provincias de El Oro, Loja y Zamora-Chinchipe. Quito: Ediciones Abya Yala; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  122. 122.

    Aguirre Z, Yaguana C, Merino B: Plantas medicinales de la zona andina de la provincia de Loja, Ecuador. Loja: Herbario y Jardín Botánico “Reinaldo Espinosa”; 2014

  123. 123.

    Léon-Yánez S, Valencia R, Pitman N, Endara C, Navarrete H. Libro rojo de las plantas endémicas del Ecuador. 2ath ed. Quito: Publicaciones del Herbario QCA, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  124. 124.

    Pardo-de-Santayana M. Estudios etnobotánicos en Campoo (Cantabria): conocimiento y uso tradicional de plantas, vol. 33. Madrid: Editorial CSIC-CSIC Press; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  125. 125.

    Monigatti M, Bussmann RW, Weckerle CS. Medicinal plant use in two Andean communities located at different altitudes in the Bolívar Province, Peru. J Ethnopharmacol. 2013;145(2):450–64.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  126. 126.

    Malla B, Chhetri RB. Indigenous knowledge on medicinal non-timber forest products (NTFP) in Parbat district of Nepal. Indo Glob J Pharm Sci. 2012;2(2):213–25.

    Google Scholar 

  127. 127.

    Jerves-Andrade L, Cuzco N, Tobar V, Ansaloni R, Maes L, Wilches I. Medicinal plants used in south Ecuador for gastrointestinal problems: An evaluation of their antibacterial potential. J Med Plants Res. 2014;8:1310–20.

    Google Scholar 

  128. 128.

    GLOBOCAN: Estimated Cancer Incidence, Mortality, and Prevalence Worldwide in 2012. IARC; 2014

  129. 129.

    Tariq A, Mussarat S, Adnan M, Abd-Allah EF, Hashem A, Alqarawi AA, Ullah R. Ethnomedicinal evaluation of medicinal plants used against gastrointestinal complaints. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  130. 130.

    Uddin MZ, Hassan MA. Determination of informant consensus factor of ethnomedicinal plants used in Kalenga forest, Bangladesh. Bangladesh J Plant Taxon. 2014;21:83–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


The first author was supported by a doctoral fellowship with the “Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja” and the “Secretaría de Educación Superior Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación”, and a grant from the “Universidad Politécnica de Madrid” (UPM-BSCH 2007–2008).

We extend our gratitude to the 196 vendors of the 33 traditional markets within the Loja province for sharing their wisdom.

With regard to identifying a fern species, the authors especially want to thank Dr. Benjamin Ollgaard (Biologisk Institut, Herbariet, Aarhus Universitet) for his taxonomic collaboration.

We also would like to provide a sincere recognition for the invaluable professional support from the authors to Dr. Pablo Jarrín (Universidad Regional Amazónica IKIAM), who provided useful comments to the analysis and interpretation of the measured indexes.

We would like to thank the staff at the Herbarium of the “Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja” (HUTPL) and “Universidad Nacional de Loja” (LOJA) for their taxonomical advice, particularly to Omar Cabrera and Bolívar Merino; David Duncan for his insightful comments to this manuscript; David Donoso and Daniel Horlacher who provided valuable editorial contributions; Natalia Donoso who helped to prepare the former version of the manuscript; and Raúl Sinche, Pablo Jaramillo, Ángel Cuenca, Nixon Cumbicus, Irene Jiménez, and Welinton Agreda for their cooperation during the field trips.


The first author was supported by a doctoral fellowship with the “Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja” and the “Secretaría de Educación Superior Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación”, and a grant from the “Universidad Politécnica de Madrid” (UPM-BSCH 2007–2008).

Availability of data and materials

The dataset supporting the conclusions of this article is included within the article and its Table 5.

Table 5 Medicinal plants sold in 33 traditional markets at Loja province, Southern Ecuador

Authors’ contributions

The first author carried out the fieldwork research for this study. All authors reviewed literature, analyzed the data, prepared the manuscript, provided revisions, and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interest.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

All the vendors who decided to collaborate were interviewed according to mutually agreed conditions and under Ecuador’s rights, especially with regards to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CDB).

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fani Tinitana.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tinitana, F., Rios, M., Romero-Benavides, J.C. et al. Medicinal plants sold at traditional markets in southern Ecuador. J Ethnobiology Ethnomedicine 12, 29 (2016).

Download citation


  • Traditional markets
  • Medicinal plants
  • Factor Informant Consensus
  • Fidelity Level
  • Loja province
  • Southern Ecuador