Correo Electrónico
DNINFOA - SIA
Bibliotecas
Convocatorias
Identidad U.N.
Published
Uso medicinal de fauna silvestre: diferencia de conocimientos entre grupos Mayas
Medicinal use of wildlife: difference of knowledge between Mayan groups
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15446/caldasia.v46n1.101249Keywords:
Etnomedicina, fauna silvestre, saberes tradicionales, Tzeltales, Tzotziles (es)Ethnomedicine, traditional knowledge, Tzeltals, Tzotzils, wild animals (en)
Downloads
Mundialmente se ha detectado una pérdida de conocimientos sobre el uso medicinal de la fauna silvestre, utilizada por grupos étnicos y entre generaciones. El presente estudio se enfocó en determinar: 1) el grado de similitud y 2) si existen diferencias en el conocimiento tradicional que tienen de la fauna silvestre con usos medicinales; se consideraron los géneros sexuales (hombres y mujeres) y los grupos etarios (30-50 y >50 años) de los pobladores maya-descendientes (Tzotzil y Tzeltal) en la zona de Los Altos de Chiapas. La información se recopiló mediante entrevistas semiestructuradas a descendientes de la población Maya y se analizó la información general (uso terapéutico sin detalles) y específica (conocimiento sobre qué animal se emplea para contrarrestar qué enfermedad y la dosis o forma de emplearlo). Se entrevistaron 180 mujeres y 188 hombres mayores de edad que voluntariamente participaron en el estudio. El análisis multivariado de agrupamiento sin ponderación (UPGMA), demostró que hay mayor similitud de conocimiento sobre la fauna medicinal entre las mujeres Tzotziles (92,30 %) y entre los hombres del grupo etario de 30-50 años de las dos etnias (91,66 %). La prueba de máxima verosimilitud mostró las diferencias respecto a la información general y específica. Estos resultados sugieren procesos de transculturación y migración entre los grupos actuales. El trabajo demuestra que existe mayor similitud entre hombres que pertenecen a los dos grupos étnicos entre 30-50 años, en comparación con mujeres de ambas etnias y grupos etarios.
Worldwide, a loss of knowledge has been detected about the medicinal use of wild fauna used by ethnic groups and between generations. For this reason, the present study focused on determining whether there are differences in the use of traditional medicinal knowledge of wildlife between genders and age groups (30-50 and >50 years) of two ethnic groups, Tzotzil and Tzeltal that are in the Los Altos area of Chiapas. Information collected through semi-structured interviews general knowledge (they knew it was used to heal) and detailed knowledge (they knew it was used for a specific type of disease) were included with Tzotzil and Tzeltal Mayan descendants, respectively, who included 180 women and 188 men. The Unweighted Pair Group Method with Arithmetic Mean (UPGMA) by Ward’s method, showed a more significant similarity of knowledge of medicinal fauna between Tzotzil women of both age groups (92.30 %) and among men of the age group of 30-50 years of the two ethnicities (91.66 %). Furthermore, maximum likelihood test showed differences between observed and expected values in the loss of general traditional knowledge; but it is statistical marginal for detailed information. These results suggest processes of transculturation, and migration, between current groups. Therefore, this work demonstrates that there is a more significant similarity in the knowledge of wild fauna for medicinal use in men belonging to the two ethnic groups who are between 30-50 years old. Compared to women of both ethnicities and age groups.
References
Adeola MO. 1992. Importance of Wild Animals and Their Parts in the Culture, Religious Festivals, and Traditional Medicine, of Nigeria. Environ. Conserv. 19(2):125–134. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892900030605 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892900030605
Alonso-Castro AJ, Carranza-Álvarez C, Maldonado-Miranda JJ, Jacobo-Salceo MDR, Quezada-Rivera DA, Lorenzo-Márquez H, Figueroa-Zuñiga LA, Fernández-Galicia C, Ríos-Reyes NA, León-Rubio RM, Rodríguez-Gallegos V, Medellín-Milán P. 2011. Zootherapeutic practices in Aquismón, San Luis Potosí, México. J. Ethnopharmacol. 138(1):233-237. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2011.09.020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2011.09.020
Alonso-Castro AJ. 2014. Use of medicinal fauna in Mexican traditional medicine. J. Ethnopharmacol. 152(1):53-70. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2014.01.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2014.01.005
Álvarez Del Toro M. 1993. Chiapas y su biodiversidad. Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Chiapas: Gobierno del Estado de Chiapas.
Alves RN Alves HN. 2011. The faunal drugstore: Animal-based remedies used in traditional medicines in Latin America. J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed. 7(9):1-43. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-7-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-7-9
Alves RN, Rosa IL. 2005. Why study the use of animal products in traditional medicines? J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed. 1(5):1-5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-1-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-1-5
De María y Campos T. 1979. Los animales en la medicina tradicional mesoamericana. An. Antropol. 16:183–223.
Díaz-Bravo L, Torruco-García U, Martínez-Hernández M, Varela-Ruiz M. 2013. La entrevista, recurso flexible y dinámico. Investigación. Educa. Méd. 2(7):162–167. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2007-5057(13)72706-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2007-5057(13)72706-6
Canales M, Hernández T, Caballero J, Romo de Vivar A, Durán A, Lira R. 2006. Análisis Cuantitativo Del Conocimiento Tradicional De Las Plantas Medicinales En San Rafael, Coxcatlán. Acta. Bot. Mex. 75:21–43. doi: https://doi.org/10.21829/abm75.2006.1013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21829/abm75.2006.1013
Costa-Neto E, Alves RN. 2010. Estado da arte da Zooterapia popular no. En: Costa-Neto EM, Alves RRN, editores. Zooterapia: os animais na medicina popular brasileira. NUPPEA, Recife, p.13–54.
Cox PA. 2000. Will tribal knowledge survive the millennium? Science 287(5450):44–45. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.287.5450.44 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.287.5450.44
Cragg GM, Newman DJ. 2013. Natural products: A continuing source of novel drug leads. Biochim. Biophys. Acta. 1830(6):3670-3695. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbagen.2013.02.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbagen.2013.02.008
Cruz-Lara L 2002. Diversidad de mamíferos en cafetales y selva mediana de las cañadas de la selva Lacandona, Chiapas, México. [Tesis]. [Chiapas]: El Colegio de la Frontera Sur.
De Albuquerque UP, Hanazaki N. 2009. Five problems in current ethnobotanical research and some suggestions for strengthening them. Hum. Ecol. 37(5):653-661. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-009-9259-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-009-9259-9
Enríquez-Vázquez VP, Mariaca MR, Retana GO, Naranjo PE. 2006. Uso medicinal de la fauna silvestre en los altos de Chiapas, México. Interciencia 31(7):491-499.
Flores F. 2004. Ratas ¿Alimento o medicina? En: Cocina Exótica de Chiapas. Serie Cocina indígena y popular Nº45: Consejo Nacional para la Cultura y las Artes; p. 1-54.
Godoy R, Reyes-García V, Byron E, Leonard WR, Vadez V. 2005. The Effect of Market Economies on the Well-Being of Indigenous Peoples and on Their Use of Renewable Natural Resources. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 34:121-138. doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.34.081804.120412 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.34.081804.120412
Gordillo M. 2001. Mastofauna del Área Natural Protegida “Barra de Tonalá”, Chiapas, México. [Tesis]. [Chiapas]: Universidad de Ciencias y Artes de Chiapas.
Gorenflo LJ, Romaine S, Mittermeier RA, Walker-Painemilla K. 2012. Co-occurrence of linguistic and biological diversity in biodiversity hotspots and high biodiversity wilderness areas. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109(21):8032-8037. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1117511109 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1117511109
Guerra M. 2001. Cacería de subsistencia en dos localidades de la Selva Lacandona. [Tesis] [Chiapas]: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Hunn E. 1977. Tzeltal folk zoology. The classification of discontinuities in nature. Academic Press EEUU.
Huntington HP. 2011. The local perspective. Nature 478:182-183. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/478182a DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/478182a
Krejcie RV, Morgan DW. 1970. Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 30(3):607-610. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308
Lozoya X. 1982. Visión histórica de la medicina tradicional. En Ortiz F. Vida y muerte del mexicano. Tomo 2. Folios Ediciones México; p. 17–22.
Lu F. 2007. Integration into the market among indigenous peoples: A cross-cultural perspective from the Ecuadorian Amazon. Curr. Anthropol. 48(4):593-602. doi: https://doi.org/10.1086/519806 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/519806
Machkour-M’Rabet S, Hénaut Y, Winterton P, Rojo R. 2011. A case of zootherapy with the tarantula Brachypelma vagans Ausserer, 1875 in traditional medicine of the Chol Mayan ethnic group in Mexico. J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed. 7(12):1-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-7-12 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-7-12
Mentanko J. 2020. The gendered politics of fieldwork and state medicine in the Altos of Chiapas, 1940–1960. Hist Anthropol Chur. 34(2):1-19. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02757206.2020.1830388 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02757206.2020.1830388
Milligan GW. 1980. An examination of the effect of six types of error perturbation on fifteen clustering algorithms. Psychometrika 45(3):325-342. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02293907 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02293907
Mueller JG, Assanou IHB, Dan Guimbo ID, Almedom AM. 2010. Evaluating rapid participatory rural appraisal as an assessment of ethnoecological knowledge and local biodiversity patterns: Contributed paper. Conservation Biology, 24(1):140–150. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01392.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01392.x
Mülleried F. 1957. Geología de Chiapas. Chiapas, México. Ediciones del Gobierno del Estado, de Chiapas.
Neto LB, Carlos J, Cruz R. 2020. Identidad-transculturación y su tratamiento pedagógico en la enseñanza media de Cuba y Brasil. Rev. Educ. Pública. 29:1-25.
Page J. 1996. Religión y política en el consumo de prácticas médicas en una comunidad tzotzil. Estudio de caso. Monografía Instituto de Estudios Indigenistas Universidad Autónoma de Chiapas 6:155–285.
R Core Team. 2018. [ Revisada en: 13 de Julio de 2021] https://www.R-project.org
Romo I. 2000. Estructura y condiciones microambientales en bosques perturbados de Los Altos de Chiapas, México. [Tesis]: [Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México].
SAS Institute Inc.1989–2021. JMP versión 5.1.2. Cary, NC.
Saslis-Lagoudakis CH, Clarke AC. 2013. Ethnobiology: The missing link in ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol. 28(2):67-68. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.10.017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.10.017
Sánchez AM. 2000. Los tzotziles-tzeltales y su relación con la fauna silvestre. Tuxtla Gutiérrez, México, Consejo para la Cultura y las Artes de Chiapas.
Signorell A. 2021. DescTools: Tools for descriptive statistics. R package version 0.99.43.
Smith EA, Wishnie M. 2000. Conservation and Subsistence in Small Scale Societies. Annu. Rev. Anthropo. 29:493-524. doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.29.1.493 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.29.1.493
Vandebroek I, Reyes-García V, De Albuquerque UP, Bussmann R, Pieroni A. 2011. Local knowledge: Who cares? J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed. 7(35):1-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-7-35 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-7-35
Zaragoza-Contreras LG. 2010. Cultura, identidad y etnicidad, aproximaciones al entorno multicultural: rompiendo costumbres y paradigmas cotidianos. Cuicuilco. 48:149-164.
Zar JH. 1999. Biostatistical analysis. India. Pearson Education.
How to Cite
APA
ACM
ACS
ABNT
Chicago
Harvard
IEEE
MLA
Turabian
Vancouver
Download Citation
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
