Skip to main content

Table 1 Ethnoveterinary studies of Pakistan considered in the current review

From: Ethnoveterinary plants of Pakistan: a review

Reference Number of plant species Collection of botanical vouchers Reported local names Reported methods of preparation Areas/Regions Languages Characteristics of the study participants Methodological framework (data collection techniques and data analysis)
Abbasi et al. [24] 89 Yes Yes Yes Haripur, Abbottabad, Mansehra Hindko Farmers, shepherds, housewives, and herbalists Participatory rural appraisal (PRA) approach was adopted. Information was collected through semi-structured interviews.
Cultural importance index (CI) was used to analyze the data.
Ahmad et al. [25] 22 Yes Yes Yes Thakht-e-Sulaiman Hills Pashto Male informants Snowball sampling and detailed unstructured interviews were utilized as well as group discussions.
Informant consensus factor (ICF) and fidelity level (FL) were calculated and applied to the collected data.
Ahmed & Murtaza [26] 24 No Yes Yes District Muzaffarabad Hindku Males and females (local healers and shepherds) Data was collected through semi-structured interviews.
Informant consensus factor (ICF) and fidelity level (FL) were used to analyze the data.
Ali et al. [27] 51 Yes Yes Yes Central Karakoram National Park Balti Traditional healers and livestock holders (men and women) Participatory rural appraisal (PRA) approach was adopted. Data was gathered through semi-structured questionnaires and interviews.
Informant consensus factor (ICF) was used to analyze the data.
Aziz et al [28] 94 Yes Yes Yes South Waziristan, Bajaur Pashto Local peoples (men and women) Semi-structured interviews were used to collect the data, which was analyzed through informant consensus factor (ICF).
Badar et al. [29] 46 No Yes Yes District Jhang Punjabi Traditional healers Rapid and participatory rural appraisal techniques were used for collection of information i.e. interviews and focus group discussions were utilized to gather the data. Data was not subjected to applied statistics.
Deeba et al. [30] 39 No Yes Yes Faisalabad Not mentioned Elders and traditional healers Rapid rural appraisal (RRA) and participatory rural appraisal (PRA) techniques were used for selection of key respondents. Data was gathered through unstructured interviews. Gathered data was not subjected to applied statistics.
Dilshad et al. [31] 66 No Yes Yes District Sargodha Punjabi Traditional veterinary healers Information was collected using rapid and participatory rural appraisal techniques through interviews and focus group discussions. Data was not subjected to applied statistics.
Dilshad et al. [32] 25 No Yes Yes District Sargodha Not mentioned Traditional healers Information was collected using a well-structured questionnaire, open ended interviews and guided dialogue techniques. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Farooq et al. [33] 18 Yes Yes Yes Cholistan Desert Saraiki Traditional healers and herdsmen (males) Rapid rural appraisal approach was adopted. Data was gathered using a well-structured questionnaire and through open-ended interviews and guided dialogue techniques. Data was not subjected to applied statistics.
Harun et al. [34] 53 Yes Yes Yes Kasur, Faisalabad, Vehari, Sargodha, Gujrat, Narowal Punjabi Males and females, shepherds, and ruminant caretakers Group discussions and individual ethnobotanical semi-structured interviewing techniques were used for data collection. Data was analyzed through relative frequency of citation (RFC), pair wise comparison method (PC), cluster analysis and descriptive statistics.
Hussain et al. [35] 41 Yes Yes Yes District Sahiwal Punjabi and Saraiki Traditional veterinary healers Participatory rural appraisal approach for data collection using a well-structured questionnaire. Information was collected through interviews and focus group discussions. No ethnobotanical indices were used to analyze the data.
Islam et al. [36] 30 No Yes No Mansehra Hindko, Gurjar, Pashto Local people Data was gathered through questionnaires and interviews but lacked useful information on the type of interview and questionnaire. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Khan & Hanif [37] 54 Yes Yes Yes District Bhimber, Azad Kashmir Not mentioned Healers and male informants, shepherds, farmers, and herbal sellers Data was gathered through interviews but lacked useful information on the type of interview. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Khan et al. [38] 83 No Yes Yes District Peshawar Pashto Local healers Data was gathered through a questionnaire and interviews but lacked useful information on the type of interview and questionnaire. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Khan et al. [39] 35 no Yes Yes Cholistan Desert Not mentioned Local pastoralists, veterinary practitioners, and quacks Data was collected through open-ended interviews and guided dialogue techniques. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Khan et al. [40] 19 Yes Yes Yes Poonch Valley, Azad Kashmir Not mentioned Local men and women Data was gathered through interviews but lacked useful information on the type of interview. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Khan et al. [41] 13 No Yes No Deosai Plateau Shina Local experts (both men and women) Data and related information were collected through semi-structured questionnaires. Data was analyzed using use value (UV) and relative citation frequency (RFCs).
Khattak et al. [42] 46 No Yes Yes Karak District Pashto Elders (male and females) Data was gathered through semi-structured questionnaires. The data obtained were quantitatively analyzed using use value (UV).
Khuroo et al. [43] 24 No Yes Yes Kashmir Himalaya Not mentioned Traditional healers Data was gathered through interviews but lacked useful information on the type of interview. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Mirani et al. [44] 22 No Yes Yes Tharparkar Not mentioned Farmers Data was collected through semi-structured open-ended interviews, observations, focus group discussions through participatory rural appraisal (PRA). Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Mirani et al. [123] 35 No Yes Yes Tharparkar Not mentioned Cattle farmers Data was collected through semi-structured open-ended interviews, observations, focus group discussions through participatory rural appraisal (PRA). Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Muhammad et al. [45] 22 No Yes Yes Faisalabad Not mentioned Owners of pneumatic-cart pulling camels Data was collected through a questionnaire but lacked useful information on its nature. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Mussarat et al. [46] 43 Yes Yes Yes Indus River Saraiki Community members (male and female) Semi-structured questionnaires were used for data collection. Informant consensus and fidelity level as well as direct matrix ranking were used to analyze the data.
Raza et al. [47] 64 Yes Yes Yes Cholistan Desert Saraiki Livestock farmers and livestock healers Structured questionnaire was used to collect data. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Raziq et al. [48] 8 No Yes Yes Sulaiman Mountain Not mentioned Camel healers and healers Data was collected through interviews but lacked useful information on its nature. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Shah et al. [49] 54 Yes Yes Yes District Abbottabad Not mentioned Traditional healers, women, and herdsmen Data was collected through interviews but lacked useful information on its nature. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Sher et al. [50] 29 No Yes Yes District Swat Pashto Males Semi-structured questionnaire was used to collect the data. Data was not analyzed using any ethnobotanical index.
Sindhu et al. [51] 35 No Yes Yes District Mansehra Not mentioned Veterinarians, local healers, and farmers Data was collected through interviews but lacked useful information on its nature. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Sindhu et al. [52] 35 No Yes Yes District Jhang Urdu Veterinarians and local communities Data was collected through interviews but lacked useful information on its nature. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Tariq et al. [53] 41 Yes Yes Yes Kohat Hindko Local farmers and nomadic people Semi-structured questionnaires were used for data collection. Informant consensus and fidelity level were used to analyze the data.
Tariq et al. [54] 24 No Yes Yes Hangu region Pashto Farmers and migrants (Afghan refugees) Data was collected through semi-structured questionnaires and analyzed through informant consensus and fidelity level.
ul Islam et al. [55] 28 No Yes Yes Malakand Valley Not mentioned Local communities men and women Data was collected through semi-structured questionnaires and analyzed through direct matrix ranking (DMR).
Ullah et al. [56] 60 No Yes No District Charsadda Pashto Local peoples including farmers The methodological framework is ambiguous with no clear indication of used questionnaires or interviews. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.
Yousafzai et al. [57] 49 No Yes Yes Marghazar Valley, District Swat Not mentioned Males and females The methodological framework is ambiguous with no clear indication of used questionnaires or interviews. Data was not subjected to analysis using any ethnobotanical index.