UNIVERSITY MONTPELLIER II SCIENCES AND TECHNICS OF LANGUEDOC
Cocoa, coffee and sugarcane farmers: an ethnobotanical characterization of their homegardens in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico)
February - August 2012
By: Rozenn Quique, Master 2 student in Tropical Plant Biodiversity Supervised by: Anne Damon and Lorena Soto Pinto (ECOSUR)
At: El Colegio de la Frontera Sur (ECOSUR) Carretera Antiguo Aeropuerto km 2.5, CP 30700 Tapachula, Chiapas, Mexico
Photos on the front page (author: R.Quique), from left to right First line: young cocoa trees in a homegarden of El Hular; sugarcane field next to a studied homegarden in Las Delicias; young coffee trees in a homegarden of El Aguila Second line: homegarden entry in El Aguila; cocoa drying platform in a homegarden of El Hular; homegarden entry in Las Delicias; ornamental plants elevated on a bench in a homegarden of El Aguila.
UNIVERSITY MONTPELLIER II SCIENCES AND TECHNICS OF LANGUEDOC
Cocoa, coffee and sugarcane farmers: an ethnobotanical characterization of their homegardens in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico)
February - August 2012
By: Rozenn Quique, Master 2 student in Tropical Plant Biodiversity Supervised by: Anne Damon and Lorena Soto Pinto (ECOSUR)
At: El Colegio de la Frontera Sur (ECOSUR) Carretera Antiguo Aeropuerto km 2.5, CP 30700 Tapachula, Chiapas, Mexico
TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1 Homegarden: an old and widely used agroecosystem ........................................................ 1 Homegardens for biodiversity conservation at farm and landscape scales ......................... 1 Influence of the socioeconomic context on homegardens .................................................. 2 Socioeconomic context of the Soconusco region ................................................................ 3 Objectives of the study ....................................................................................................... 5 Study context ....................................................................................................................... 5 METHODS ............................................................................................................................... 6 1. Study area ........................................................................................................................ 6 1.1. Geographical location and biophysical environment .......................................... 6 1.2. Socioeconomic context of the studied villages ................................................... 7 2. Data collection................................................................................................................. 8 2.1. Homegarden selection and interview conditions ................................................ 8 2.2. Interrelations between the homegarden and the gardener(s) .............................. 9 2.3. Species inventory and identification ................................................................... 9 3. Data analyses ................................................................................................................. 10 RESULTS ................................................................................................................................ 11 1. Size and structure ........................................................................................................ 11 2. Agricultural management ............................................................................................ 11 2.1. Fertilizer practices ........................................................................................... 11 2.2. Pest management ............................................................................................. 12 2.3. Control of weeds and source of cultivated plants ............................................ 12 3. Taxonomic composition ............................................................................................... 13 4. The uses of plant species .............................................................................................. 14 4.1. Ornamental plants: as luxury items in the home .............................................. 14 4.2. Food plants ........................................................................................................ 15 4.3. Home remedy plants ......................................................................................... 16 DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................................ 17 -
-
.......... 17
Comparisons between villages and relations between homegardens and commercial crops ........................................................................................................................................... 18 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................... 20 Acknowledges Bibliography Appendices Abstract
Table 1 Plant diversity inventoried by ten studies in Mexican homegardens (HG) in tropical humid regions Location and reference
Number of HG
Garden size
Total species number (all growth forms except the first)
Species number per HG
Yucatán (Caballero, 1992)
60
600 to 2000 m2
83 of trees and shrubs
NA
Tixpeual and Tixcacaltnyub, Yucatán (Rico-Gray et al., 1990)
20 & 22
400 to 500 m2 800 to 3200 m2
135 133
NA
Quitana Roo (De Clerck & Negreros-Castillo, 2000)
80
NA
150
Average of 39
San Miguel Talea de Castro, Oaxaca ( Manzanero et al ., 2009) Balzapote, Veracruz (AlvarezBuylla et al., 1989)
10
NA
121
16 to 62
64
225 to 3400 m2
338
NA
Calakmul, Campeche (Neulinger et al., 2009) Pomuch, Campeche ( Poot Pool, 2008) Palenque, Chiapas (Vogl et al., 2002)
20
NA
310
32 to 141
24
344 to 1000.5 m2
142
8 to 28
30
Average of 2025 to 2500 m2
241
25 to 82
La Trinitaria, Chiapas (Díaz Santana, 2011) Soconusco, Chiapas (Gasco, 2008)
30
Average 2500 m2
133
NA
12
625 to 10000 m2
240
28 to 93
INTRODUCTION Homegardens: an old and widely used agroecosystem Mexico has a long experience of domestication, indeed, for more than 9000 years its inhabitants have domesticated and grown plants like maize (Zea mays L.) and cocoa (Theobroma cacao L.) (Colunga- García Marín & Zizumbo-Villarreal, 2004). In order to do so, they have created agroecosystems with great diversity of associated species like the milpa1 and the huerto2 (Rosenswig, 2006; González Jácome, 2007). Homegarden is a characteristic agroecosystem in many tropical countries, particularly abundant in Central America, Southeast Asia and Pacific islands (Nair & Kumar, 2006). Homegardens are defined by Fernandes & Nair (1986) as a « land use systems involving deliberate management of multipurpose trees and shrubs in intimate association with annual and perennial agricultural crops and, invariably, livestock, within the compounds of individual houses, the whole crop-tree-animal unit being intensively managed by family labour ». In the scientific literature they are characterized as an agroforest, whose structure is very similar to natural forest (Fernandes & Nair, 1986; Blanckaert et al., 2004). Caballero (1992) estimated that the size of the traditional Maya homegardens ranged mainly from 0.6 to 2 ha. In most of the studies on homegardens, every species present has a use and can provide a diversity of food products all year round (e.g. vegetables, fruits, meats, etc.), which makes them one of the most commonly used agroecosystems for subsistence agriculture. The mains uses cited are: food, ornament, medicine, and timber derived from either cultivated or spontaneous plants (Montagnini, 2006). Homegarden management is more efficient and requires lower external inputs than other agroecosystems, which is in part due to their small sizes (Kumar & Nair, 2004; Montagnini, 2006). Homegardens for biodiversity conservation at farm and landscape scales A common characteristic of homegardens is their high number of species (including spontaneous), with some authors referring to them as a hotspot of agrobiodiversity (Galluzi et al., 2010) or advancing that they might be the most diverse agroforestry practices (Nair, 2006). From the literature, Mexican farmers typically grow more than 20 plants species in their homegardens, which can rise to at least 141 species (Table 1). Regionally, species number varies greatly due in part to the high variation in the number of studied homegardens 1
Refers to the agroecosystem in which maize is most of the time cultivate with beans and squash (Curcubita spp.) and other associated species (can find up to 20 species of plants, including trees) González Jácome, 2007. 2 Spanish name for homegarden (solar, patio are also used).
1
and in the study durations. In Mexico, three studies of different tropical regions (Campeche, Yucatán, Veracruz) have listed more than 300 species (Heindorf, 2011). Homegardens show us that farmers can respectfully manage, enjoy and sustainably exploit high levels of biodiversity within a small part of land, which has important repercussions for the conservation of soil, biodiversity and human culture (Torquebiau, 1992). It is important to recall that the species grown in homegardens are under constant environmental and human pressures, which drive the process of evolution and adaptation. Their inter and intraspecific diversity make them of particular interest for conservation in situ, even more nowadays where native cultivars are being challenged by commercial cultivars (Galluzi et al., 2010). Low number of shared species between homegardens, which has been reported by various studies, is an important characteristic for the biodiversity conservation at local and regional scales (Caballero, 1992; Vogl, 2002; Gasco, 2008; Van der Wal & Bongers, 2012). By the numerous introductions of rare species, homegardens might prevent erosion of an ecological Deforestation has created highly fragmented landscapes, in which small patches of original forests become trapped in an agricultural matrix or mosaic. Perfecto & Vandermer (2008) support the idea of making these matrices an
facilitate migrations between patches of
habitats (e.g. forests, agroforests, homegardens). Thus, they emphasize the importance of farmer participation in the conservation of biodiversity and the importance of conservation strategies within potentially biofriendly agroecosystems like homegardens. Influence of the socioeconomic context on homegardens Homegardens are not static agroecosystems, various socioeconomic factors influence the agrobiodiversity and management of homegardens, their development and persistence are influenced by cultural and socioeconomic conditions. For example, the distance from the city market, migration, acculturation, family income and farmer knowledge are some of the factors that can have an impact upon homegarden agrobiodiversity and management (Chavero & Alvarez-Buylla, 1988; Peyre et al., 2006; Kehlenbeck et al., 2007). The latter authors argue that the degree of influence varies over time, i.e. previously, agroecological characteristics impacted more the plant diversity than the socioeconomic factors, while now socioeconomic factors prevailed over the gardener and agroecological characteristics. Evidence suggests that farmers, who are strongly involved in commercial agriculture, have reduced biodiversity in their homegardens and have less knowledge associated with it (Caballero, 1992; Belcher et al., 2005; Kehlenbeck et al., 2007). Studying the nutritional 2
consequences of transformation from subsistence to commercial agriculture, in the case of particular crops like sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) cocoa, banana (Musa spp.) in Tabasco, Mexico, Dewey (1981) argues that wage labor could negatively impact nutritional status because of a reduction in the time and energy available for family members to grow their own food. In Indonesia, homegardens close to urban centers seem to play a more aesthetical role than in the rural homegardens, which result in the formers to have more ornamental plants than food plants (Wiersum, 2006). This trend was also described in rural communities of Yucatán, Mexico (Rico-Gray et al., 1990; Hernández-Sánchez et al., 2012). The former author, names the dominance of ornamental species and aesthetic arrangements found in cities, (e.g. pruning shapes):
Spanish:
In
Campeche, Mexico, families with comfortable standard of living have more ornamental species than food species in their homegardens than the families with poor incomes (Poot Pool, 2008). structure and function are closely related (Soemarwoto & Soemarwoto, 1982 in Rico-Gray et al., 1990). Women, who are very often the main gardener and have more knowledge about plant than men, seem to have a positive influence on the plant diversity (Howard, 2006). A recent study in Campeche showed that homegardens are less diversified when the decisions are taken by men than the when it is taken by women (Perea Mercado, 2011). Socioeconomic context of the Soconusco region Soconusco is a region situated on the coast
tate. Its
climate, fertile soils and localization on the border with Guatemala have made it the most productive region of Chiapas State since the middle of the XIXth century, which is the moment in time in which coffee (Coffea spp.) plantations started to spread (Santacruz León, 2007). Before the coffee era, in which Soconusco and other regions of Chiapas became famous, the inhabitants of Soconusco mainly lived from subsistence agriculture, and cocoa, copal (resin from Bursera spp.) and indigo (Indigofera tinctoria L.) were some of the few products traded outside the state (Bartra, 1995). Soconuscan farmers have centuries of experience with cocoa cultivation, Spanish conquistador, Bernal Díaz del Castillo described the whole province (Soconusco) was a garden of cocoa trees and was very pleasant, and now in 1578 it is so desolate and abandoned that there are no more than Cited by Coe & Coe, 1996 in Ogata, 2003). This last 3
assertion refers to the consequence of Spanish colonization which had greatly affected the indigenous population (Aztec and Toltec origins), which by the XXth century represented less than 22 % of the inhabitants of Soconusco and less that 13% of the population spoke an mestizos3 and large numbers of immigrants from Guatemala who originally came to work in the big coffee plantations. Presently, more than 50 % of Socon agriculture sector (Santacruz León, 2007; Gasco, 2008). Nowadays, the main perennial crops cultivated in the Soconusco are in descending order: coffee, mango (Mangifera indica L.), banana, cocoa and sugarcane (Bello, 2010). E
and
unfortunately for most of th
size of coffee and cocoa farms in Chiapas
average 2 ha), the incomes drawn from their farms are often not enough to cover the expenses; e.g. alimentation, education, health (Pohlan, 2005; Santacruz León et al., 2008). Chiapas is characterized by rural poverty; inequalities and a scarcity of educational opportunities, with cultural issues being an important part of the problem (Corzo Ornelas, 2004). In various states of Mexico, and also in many other countries, some governmental programs like PESA4 or those carried out by non-governmental organizations have started to promote homegardens in order to assure food self-sufficiency, health, education and to reduce poverty (Landon-Lane, 2004; Corzo Márquez & Shwartz, 2008; Zuleta, 2008; Aguirre Pineda & Rosette Castro, 2010). Regarding the homegardens of Soconusco, there is only one published article (Gasco, 2008), in which the author describes an ethnoecological analysis of the plant agrobiodiversity (diversity indices, uses) of twelve homegardens in the municipality of Acacoyagua. The literature on homegardens in other regions of Chiapas is also scarce whereas other states like Yucatán and Veracruz seem to have received more attention (Heindorf, 2011). One explication for the scarcity of studies on homegardens in Soconusco seems to be that many studies on homegardens have focused on native Indian populations, excluding populations with no indigenous traditional knowledge (Gasco, 2008).
3 4
Who have for ancestry a mix of Spanish/European and Indigenous parentages (Gasco, 2008) Programa Especial de Seguridad Alimentaria (Special Program of Food Security) promoted by FAO
4
Source: INEGI Fig.1 Geographic localizations of the Soconusco region and the three villages of the studied homegardens
Objectives of the study In order to extend the knowledge of
main objective of
the present thesis was to characterize their agrobiodiversity, from the ethnobotanical approach. To achieve it, it studied the plant composition of the homegardens and the relations between the gardener(s) and their plants. The second objective was to study the influence of the surrounding main commercial crop on the management and plant diversity of the homegardens. To that end, the study took place in three villages, each with one of the following main commercial crops of the region: cocoa, coffee or sugarcane, and exchanges between the commercial plot and the homegardens were analyzed. It also tried to identify socioeconomic factors that have influence on homegardens. Study context This thesis was (El Colegio de la Frontera Sur) which along with its objectives of plant conservation and environmental education, carries out scientific research on the ecology and sustainable cultivation of the native plants of the Soconusco region, and the proposed thesis fits within this context. The thesis was not part of a research project, thus expenses were covered by the personal scholarships.
5
Table 2 Geographical characteristics of the three studied villages in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico) a
Municipality
Coordinates Distance from the main cityb Distance from Tapachulac (time transportation)
El Aguila
Las Delicias
El Hular
Cacahoatán
Huixtla
Tuzantán
15°06
15°05
8 km (20 min.) 50 km (50 min.)
15 km (30 min.) 40 km (50 min.)
18 km (30 min.) 30 km (50 min.)
92°23 24
Source: Google Earth and INEGI (2010) a
n division superior to village ( ) in b main cities are Huixtla (32 033 habitants) for Las Delicias and El Hular; and Cacahoatán (16 572 habitants) for El Aguila c Tapachula is the second most populated city of Chiapas (202 672 habitants)
Table 3 Biophysical factors of the three studied villages in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico) El Aguila
Las Delicias
El Hular
1244
20
60
Semi warm and humid with abundant rains in summer
Warm sub-humid with rains in summer
Warm humid with abundant rains in summer
10 - 26°C
20 -30°C
20 -30°C
Precipitation (for the municipality)
4000 - 4500 mm
1500 - 4000 mm
2000 - 5000 mm
Soil
Andisol
Cambisol (sands in some parts)
Cambisol
Surrounding vegetation(s)
Temporal agriculture with perenniala and semiperenniala and cloud forest
Temporal agriculture and cultivated pasture land
Temporal agriculture with perenniala and semiperenniala
Altitude (m.a.s.l.) Climate Temperature (for the municipality)
Source: INEGI (2010) a
perennial refers to species with vegetative cycles > 6 years while semi-perennial refers to species with vegetative cycles of between 1 and 6 years
METHODS 1. Study area 1.1 Geographical location and biophysical environment The study took place in three villages that belong to three different municipalities of the Soconusco region (see map Fig.1 and Table 2). These municipalities were chosen for their distinctive commercial crops, while previously made acquaintances of farmers allowed us to choose the villages. The three villages are all served by public transports to the main cities and to Tapachula with a similar duration of travel. In the region of Soconusco, the wet season starts approximately in mid-May and lasts until mid-October. The three villages differ on various biophysical factors and particularly on altitude (Table 3). The most distinctive village was El Aguila with its high altitude (>1200 m.a.s.l) and thus a climate much cooler than in Las Delicias and El Hular. It is also noteworthy to mention that various homegardens of El Aguila have a large part of their area on a slope. Andisol is found in El Aguila due to the proximity of the v Delicias and El Hular have similar soil, although, different land uses have preceded the village settlements. Previously, Las Delicas was covered by pastures, while El Hular consisted of native vegetation and rubber plantations (Personal communications). Nowadays, the only village with native vegetation relatively close and abundant is El Aguila. according to Gonzalez-Espinosa & Ramirez-Marcial in Ramirez-Marcial et al., 2010) can be found in the non-exploited forests as well as in some coffee agroforests, such as: Erythrina chiapasana Krukoff and Vernonia patens Kunth. In El Hular native vegetation from the tropical semi-deciduous forest is mainly restrained to some individuals in cocoa agroforests Aspidosperma desmanthum Beth. Ex Müll. Arg., Terminalia amazonia (J.F. Gmel.) Exell. and Castilla elastica Sessé ex Cerv.. The latter is the
is the Spanish name for rubber. Native vegetation in Las Delicias is more limited than in the other two villages. Secondary species of the tropical semi-deciduous forest (of lower altitude than El Hular) grow in abandoned fields or in some agroforests, such as Tabebuia rosea (Bertol.) A. DC. and Coccoloba floribunda (Benth.) Lindau (Pennington & Sarukhán, 2005).
6
Table 4 Socioeconomic data of the three studied villages in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico) El Aguila 1274
Las Delicias 1062
El Hular 381
Number of inhabitants speaking a local language
18
0
0
% of inhabitants born in Chiapas
95.45
97.27
98.69
Number of houses (number of studied homegardens)
287 (n=24)
238 (n=23)
92 (n=8)
Public facilities
- Public school (2) - Churches - Health center
- Public school (1) - Churches - Health center
- Public school (1) - Churches
Grade of social backwardness a
Low (-0.73823)
Low (-0.51522)
Middle (-0.18592)
% of economically active people b (% of economically active women)
37.31 (6.64)
45.05 (12.82)
45.08 (6.99)
Main incomes sources
Coffee
The sugarcane , sugarcane
Cocoa
Number of inhabitants
Source: INEGI (2010)
a: vary from very low to very high , it integrates the indices: of education, of access to health services, of basic services in the home, and actives in the home (CONEVAL, 2010) b: years who were working or searching for work during the INEGI survey
1.2. Socioeconomic contexts of the studied villages According to INEGI (National Institute of Statistics, Geographic and Informatics), the three villages have rural populations with less than 2500 inhabitants. El Hular is the smallest village with 381 inhabitants, while the two others have more than 1000 inhabitants (Table 4). El Aguila is the only village where some people continue to speak the local language
or the three villages, inhabitants are primarily from Chiapas and of the 55 interviewees, only two had recently moved to the village. For each 2.27118) level on the State scale (CONEVAL5, 2010). The three villages have at least one public school, various churches, and a health center (except in El Hular). Like many rural regions of Mexico, income is generated mainly by men. However, the percentage of women economically active in Las Delicias is notably superior to the two other villages. They generally work in Huixtla, a relatively big city, or for the sugarcane refinery. The latter, located at about two kilometers from Las Delicias, started its activities in 1982 and employs between 500 and 1000 people, principally from within the municipality (Narváez, 2001). Before price compared to the price offered by the refinery to buy their land or sugarcane, pushed them to switch to the sugarcane production (Personal communications). Only one of the interviewees was living off cocoa farming, 44 % had their own sugarcane plot (selling their harvest to the refinery), another 30 % worked for the refinery (position varied from harvester to technician) and 26 % had a commercial plot with different crops (maize, chili, sugarcane, various fruit trees). Grocery shops and fruit selling completed the family economy in 13 % of the HG, i.e. three HG. The percentage of economically active people in El Aguila is slightly inferior to the two other villages. This could be explained in part, by the relatively high number of its inhabitants who have immigrated to the United States of America, in the majority men (with the greatest difference between the number of men and women in El Aguila), and various families live from remittances sent by them. Sons or husbands (only one woman) of 33 % of the interviewees had been or was currently in the United States of America. While in Las Delicias and El Hular, this was seen in respectively, one and two interviewed families. Coffee farming was the main economic activity for all the interviewees but was rarely the only one.
5
National Council of the Evaluation of the Social Development Politic
7
El Aguila El Hular Las Delicias
1 cm = 78.7 m
1 cm = 115.9 m
Fig 2 Localization of the 55 studied homegardens in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico). Legend above 1 cm = 83.3 m
42 % of the HG had other economic activities such as: the sale of ornamental plants and vegetables, grocery shops, dressmaking and basket making, which were most of the time the responsibility of for self-consumption. El Aguila is the only village that has commodities to receive tourists (sanctuary for butterfly, two restaurants and hotels). In El Hular, 87.5 % of the interviewees lived off their cocoa agroforests while coffee production was the main income for one of them. A grocery shop completed the economy of one family, while fruit and chocolate products were sold by one other family. Two interviewees had a plot with maize, beans and squashes for self-consumption and selling. It is also noteworthy that in the three villages, almost every family receives at least one
common. This program helps in financial and educational ways to ameliorate the alimentation, health and education of the family. It includes an allowance for the elderly (over 70 years) that do not receive a pension. Allowances are paid every two months with amounts depending on various factors, and family members have to fulfill some obligations (e.g. attend the educational workshops, go to the assigned appointments by the health center) (Sedesol, 2012). 2. Data collection 2.1. Homegarden selection and interview conditions All the field work was carried out by the same person, from the first of April to the th
13 of June 2012. Originally, the number of selected homegardens per village was designed to cover at least 10 % of the total number of households, but available time and field conditions did not permit the study of more than 8.4 % (cf. Table 4). A random distribution of the homegardens selected for study was achieved by wandering all around the village (see localization of the homegardens Fig.2), selecting heterogonous homegarden types and interviewees; i.e. a diversity of gender, age and profession. The interviewee was the main gardener, who was usually the woman, although occasionally it was the man, or in some cases both equally worked in the homegarden. Various homegardens were recommended from past interviewees (often their family or neighbors), and if they fulfilled the pre-established conditions, they were considered for the study. Those conditions were: to have a commercial plot, presence of tree stratum, as well as, the voluntary willingness and availability of the interviewee to participate. The time spent at each homegarden varied greatly from 40 minutes
8
to two hours, depended upon the homegarden size, diversity of species and the duration of the semi-structured interview. 2.2. Interrelations between the homegarden and the gardener(s) Ethnobotany is the study of the interrelations between humans and plants through time and in different environments (Hernández Xolocotzi, 2008). In the present study, ethnobotany was used to interpret the management of the homegarden, its species diversity and the knowledge associated with it. Information on fertilizer application, animal feeding, and pest and weed control was collected by structured interviews, while the source of cultivated species was asked during their listing. Qualitative data on the economic activities and social attributes of the family were obtained by semi-structured and informal interviews. It included some information about the commercial plot, such as the species cultivated and the species used for self-consumption. The characteristics of the houses that could, in certain cases, reflect the economic status of the family, such as: the construction material, presence of household appliances and cars, were noted down. During the listing of plant species, interviewees were asked for the vernacular name, source of the plant (commercial plot, shop, friend, family, spontaneous) and uses. If medicinal, the diseases treated by the species, part of the plant used and the conditions of used (preparation) were noted. 2.3. Species inventory and identification All the domesticated animals and plant species (including the ones in the nursery), except the non-exploited weeds, were listed by their vernacular names with the help of the interviewee. Due to the difficulty to distinguish separate individuals of herbaceous or epiphytic species, only abundances of woody species (including plantains but excluding ornamental plants, live fence plants and woody species with DBH < 2 cm) were recorded. Plants were classified as shrubs according to the definition of FAO (1998):
perennial
plants, generally of more than 0.5 m and less than 5 m in height on maturity and without a definite crown
Specimens of 38 species were
collected and can be found in the Herbarium of Ecosur-Tapachula. Identification of various families, using the vegetative characters, was done thanks to the work of researchers from Montpellier, France (Barthelemy et al., 2007). Some species were identified with the help of a , a combination of the following floras was used: the list containing 1347 species found in tropical Mexican homegardens (Heindorf, 2011), the flora of the cultivated and wild species in Soconusco region (Matuda, 1950, particularly for the species with specific local names), 9
various Mexican floras (Pennington & Saruklán, 2005; Velázquez et al., 2009; Macías Sámano et al., 2012), the useful flora of Nicaragua (Pineda, 2006), species of chili peppers were identified thank to the work of Ayala Vargas (2006). The following websites were also consulted, in particular for the identification of the ornamental species: http://www.conabio.gob.mx/malezasdemexico/2inicio/home-malezas-mexico.htm http://www.tropicos.org/; http://darnis.inbio.ac.cr http://www.ceapdesign.com.br/familias_botanicas.html http://plantsarethestrangestpeople.blogspot.mx http://plantayflor.blogspot.mx http://www.arbolesornamentales.es 3. Data analyses Similarities between the three villages were analyzed with the Jaccard and Morisita-
(v.13.14) (Lafaye et al. particularly reliable. Jaccard is a non-symmetrical index based on presence-absence of species, while Morisita-Horn is a quantitative index independent of the sample size that reflects more similarities in the community structures than similarities in the community composition (Magurran, 2004). Thus, the latter could only be calculated for the tree and shrub diversity. The R program was also used for plotting the number of ornamental and food species per homegarden according to the total species number per homegarden. It allowed differentiating the homegardens between villages and genders.
10
RESULTS 1. Size and structure The size of homegardens (excluding buildings) varied greatly between the three villages; the smallest area was of 20 m2 while the largest measured 3460 m2. These two extremes were both found in El Aguila, which was the only village where homegardens (HG) of less than 500 m2 were found. HG in Las Delicias were very similar in size due to the equality of land distribution between the village members, usually 25 m2 by 50 m2 per person. In most cases (47 %) HG size ranged between 500 and 1000 m2. The total sample area per village was respectively for El Aguila, Las Delicias and El Hular: 1.9 ha, 2.2 ha and 1.0 ha. Ten HG had their size reduced by the construction of a second house for one of the children. The vertical structure was formed of at least two strata: herbs, potted plants and shrubs or small trees (including species of Musa spp.). The third stratum (< 20 m) mainly consisted of fruit trees was present in all HG, while a fourth stratum consisted of trees > 20 m was rarely seen. A stratum with epiphytes was found in more than half of the HG (57 %). The villages where epiphytes were most frequent were El Hular and El Aguila in 75 and 67 % of their HG, respectively; while only 35 % of the HG in Las Delicias had epiphytes. The scheme of the horizontal structure was very similar among the 55 HG. Ornamental plants were always placed in the front of the house or even on the street while in 57 % of the HG, fruit trees were located at the back or in few cases on one side of the house (Fig.3). Only in Las Delicias were wire fences commonly used to delimit the fruit tree area in which frequently, hens were also raised in. The main way to delimit HG was with living fences of ornamental shrubs. Plants growing around the house and along paths were often segregated by stones, wires and wooden fences or elevated on rustic benches. Aromatic, medicinal and ritual plants along with food shrubs were cultivated near to the house. 2. Agricultural management The HG was mainly managed by the woman of the house, although the man was frequently implicated in the tasks of: pruning, weeding and fertilizing. Yet a second division was commonly seen in HG where the man was often in charge of the food species while the woman took care of the ornamental and medicinal species. 2.1. Fertilizer practices Soil fertility management was for the majority of the HG limited to the use of the leaf litter from their commercial fields. In the case of the coffee farmers (El Aguila), 75 % used the leaf litter from the coffee plantations for planting ornamental and potted plants (more 11
Fig.3 Characteristic organization of the front and back of the houses of the studied homegardens in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico). Left: ornamental plants at the front of the house; right: trees and shrubs at the back of the same house (Photo: R.Quique) Araceae 25 Verbenaceae
20
Solanaceae
15 Maranthaceae
10
Euphorbiaceae
5
El Aguila
0 Lamiaceae
Las Delicias Fabaceae
Orchidaceae
Total
El Hular
Asteraceae Acanthaceae
Number of plant species per homegarden
Number of trees and shrubs per homegarden
Fig. 4 The ten richest plants families, with their species numbers, in the three studied villages in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico)
a
Homegarden size b Fig. 5 Variation of the plant diversity in relation to homegarden size. Trees and shrubs exclusively used as ornamental Homegarden size
were not counted for the Figure b.
numerous than in the other two villages). Composted coffee pulp was sometimes added depending on where the pulping was done. To the contrary, in El Hular, only one farmer used the leaf litter from his cocoa field. In Las Delicias, it was common to find in the homegardens (HG) harvest. Yet, an equal proportion (26 %) bought leaf litter from the few surrounding cocoa plantations, preferring it to the aforementioned option for being less aggressive. Compost was made in only five HG, two in El Hular and three in Las Delicias. Dead leaves with plastics or even other organic wastes were burned in more than half of the HG of Las Delicias. The spreading of ashes around trees was rarely realized. Burning of dead leaves was not seen in the other two villages. Owing to the absence of domestic animals such as pigs, sheep, cows or donkeys, manure was not used except by one family in El Aguila which had a horse (see Appendix 1 for a list of the domesticated fauna). 2.2. Pest management When asked which insects or animals caused damage to their plants, all the gardeners -cutting ants of the genus Atta. Awareness of other pests was limited to scale insects and gophers (caterpillars were cited once). Ants were frequently 6
, with slightly higher frequency in Las
Delicias. Soap (11 %) (in one case detergent), ashes and hydrated lime were used to combat ants and scale insects. Several farmers in Las Delicias, used the same chemicals that were used in the sugarcane field. Natural repellents were used by only two farmers. One in El Hular made a mixture from Tagetes erecta L., Capsicum annum L. and Equisetum arvense L. (the latter bought outside of the village), while in El Aguila, a farmer made a mixture from Ruta graveolens L., Tagetes erecta L. and Ocimum sp.. 2.3. Control of weeds and source of cultivated plants Weeds were either cut by machete and less frequently by sickle, or pulled up by hand. The task was in many cases carried out by men who had the tendency to not distinguish weeds that were used for medicinal purposes by women. To the contrary, edible plants such as Solanum americanum Mill. and Chenopodium ambrosioides L., were often tolerated. Twenty two weeds species were included in the inventory along with their uses (see Appendix 2). These species were, in few cases propagated by the gardeners but most of them were either cultivating or tolerating comestible and medicinal weeds in designated areas within the commercial plot or buying them from mobile sellers. Some fruit trees derived from seeds It is used as a powder spray, it contains methyl parathion and is relatively toxic according to its label 12
Table 5 Species diversity of cultivated and tolerated plants in the homegardens of three villages in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico) El Aguila Las Delicias Total El Hular (n = 8) (n = 24)
(n = 23)
370 141
330 136
199 105
490 199
55
72
56
97
54 %
41 %
68 %
36 %
132
84
16
-
Number of species (Nsp) Nsp without ornamentals* Nsp trees & shrubs without ornamentals* % of species inventoried in only 1 or 2 homegarden(s) Nsp exclusively inventoried in the village
(n = 53)
* were omitted only the species that were exclusively used as ornamental plants. n= number of studied homegardens
Total species El Aguila
El Aguila
Las Delicias
El Hular
(n = 24)
(n = 23)
(n = 8)
1
-
-
Food species El Aguila
Las Delicias
0.58
1
-
El Hular
0.64
0.54
1
El Aguila
Las Delicias
El Hular
1
-
-
Las Delicias
0.50
1
-
El Hular
0.50
0.39
1
El Aguila 1
Las Delicias
El Hular
-
Trees and shrubs El Aguila
0.90
0.83
a
b Ornamentals
El Aguila
El Aguila
1
Las Delicias -
Las Delicias
0.83
1
-
Las Delicias
0.60
1
0.37
El Hular
0.70
0.61
1
El Hular
0.59
0.42
1
El Hular
Shaded cells : Morisita-Horn index c d Fig.6 Tables of the Jaccard indices calculated with different plant categories found in the studied homegardens of three villages in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico). n= number of studied homegardens
Number of homegardens
5 4 El Aguila
3
Las Delicias 2
El Hular
1 0 1 to 20 21 to 30
31 to 40
41 to 50
51 to 60
61 to 70
71 to 80
81 to 90
91 to 101 to 111 to 121 to 131 to 100 110 120 130 140
Number of species per homegarden
Fig. 7 Distribution of species number in the studied homegardens in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico)
propagated by animals were also tolerated, the most frequent were Psidium spp. and Muntingia calabura L. It was also seen, in particular in El Aguila and El Hular, species of the families Orchidaceae and Bromeliaceae that were transplanted from the commercial plot (sometimes from the native vegetation) to the homegarden (HG). Varieties of mangoes and citrus fruits as well as species such as the rambutan (Nephelium lappaceum L.) were often bought as young plants. Other food species were frequently sown using the seeds left over
offered or exchanged with friends and family members living within or outside of the village. 3. Taxonomic composition The plant inventory of the 55 HG led to the identification of 490 species (including hybrids and 27 species not taxonomically identified) of 105 families. Species native to Mexico accounted for less than half of the total species (44 %). Families with numerous ornamental species such as the Araceae, the Acanthaceae, the Orchidaceae and the Maranthaceae were among the ten richest families (Fig. 4). The distribution of the ten families differed for each village, in particular the species of Orchidaceae and Maranthaceae, which were both numerous in El Aguila. Trees and shrubs counted for 20 % of the total species with 97 species identified (without the ornamental species, listed in Appendix 3), and nearly half were listed in one or two HG (47 %). The majority were species native to Mexico (66 %) while a quarter was from the Asian continent. Species richness did not rise proportionally with HG size, while the number of trees and shrubs per HG was slightly proportional to the HG size (Fig.5). The density and the number of trees and shrubs per HG varied greatly from 77.5 to 2933.3 per ha and 5 to 306 individuals per HG. More than half of the HG (59 %), with sizes varying from 3460 to 212 m2, had densities inferior to 500 trees and shrubs per ha. The village with the highest number of species was El Aguila with 370, compared to 330 and 199 species in Las Delicias and El Hular, respectively (Table 5). The differences between villages were narrowed if species exclusively used as ornamentals were omitted. Las Delicias had the highest number of tree and shrub species. Excepting for Las Delicias (41 %), more than half of the species were only found in one or two HG of each village. The Jaccard index calculated for the total listed species of the three villages gave indices of similarity of between 0.54 and 0.64 (Fig.6a). This same index calculated for food plants showed a decrease in the similarity between villages; to the contrary it increased when calculated for the ornamental plants (Fig.6b & 6c). When considering only the tree and shrub species, both, the Jaccard and Morisita-Horn indices, indicated the lowest similarity between El Hular and Las 13
233 sp 70
195 sp
316 sp
Pourcentage of species (%)
60
94 sp
50 71 sp
40 94 sp
87 sp
30
126 sp
20
35 sp
52 sp
41 sp
75 sp
10 Ornamental plants Food plants
0 El Aguila (n = 24 )
Las Delicias (n = 23)
Medicinal plants El Hular (n = 8)
Total (n = 55 )
Fig. 8 Plant distribution among the three main uses of plants in the studied homegardens in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico). n = number of studied homegardens; sp = number of species; some plants had more than one use
Table 6 Ornamental species most frequently cultivated in the studied homegardens of the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico). n = number of studied homegarden; % = percentage of homegardens El Aguila (n=24) Rosa spp.
% 71
Las Delicias (n=23) Ixora coccinea L.
% 96
El Hular (n=8) Ixora coccinea L.
% 88
Anthurium spp.
67
Begonia spp.
78
75
Begonia spp.
58
Rosa spp.
Hippeastrum spp.
58
Dieffenbachia amoena Bull.
70
Zinnia sp. Alpinia purpurata (Vieill.) NK.Schum. Caladium bicolor Vent.
Hibiscus rosa-sinensis L. Hydrangea macrophylla (Thunb.)
58
Catharanthus roseus (L.) G. Don
65
Rosa spp.
54
Hibiscus rosa-sinensis L.
65
54
Cordyline terminalis (L.) Kunth
61
Ser.
Thunbergia erecta (Benth.) T. Anderson
74
63 63 63
Delicias (Fig.6d). At the scale of HG (homegardens), diversity varied from 12 to 134 species with nearly half of the HG having between 31 and 60 species (Fig 7). Nearly 70 % of the HG in Las Delicias and 50 % of the HG in El Aguila had more than 50 species per HG. 4. The uses of plant species Interviewees were actively cultivating or passively letting plants grow for three main uses, which were, in descending order for the three villages: ornamental, food and medicinal (Fig.8). The other uses were in descending order of importance: live fences, fuel woods, timber (for construction and tools), shade, artisanal and celebrations. The number of plants used for more than one purpose was relatively small (11 % of the total species). 4.1. Ornamental plants: as luxury items in the home
component of the HG; being in various cases the dominating category. In total, 316 ornamental species were inventoried, of which 92 % (291 species) were used exclusively as ornamental plants. The most frequent ornamental species of each village are presented in Table 6. Roses (Rosa spp.) were for all three villages, found in more than 50 % of the HG. Thunbergia erecta and Ixora coccinea were the main species used as live fences. Non-native species were the most represented, only 32 % of the taxonomically identified plants being native to Mexico (list of the total ornamental species in Appendix 4). Plant names were unknown for the majority; particularly in the case of ornamental foliage species. In some
related to special morphological characteristics (e.g. lanceolata (Forssk.) Deflers
Pentas Gomphocarpus physocarpus E. Mey.).
The common names of various species varied within and between villages. At the village scale, as shown in Fig. 8, the proportion of ornamental species in El Hular was lower than in Las Delicias and El Aguila. The latter had the highest number of ornamental species, which accounted for 74 % of the total number. At the HG scale, in 62.5 % of the HG in El Hular, the proportion of ornamental species was inferior to the proportion of food species, while in El Aguila and Las Delicias, this trend was seen in 38 % and 39 % of the HG, respectively. In these two villages, various HG were found with more than 50 ornamental species (up to 90 species). The proportion of ornamental plants per HG was superior to 60 % in 14 HG. For the majority of the HG, ornamental plant diversity rose proportionately with the total species number (Fig.9). The diversity of ornamental plants seemed to be linked, in part, to the gender of the homegarden main manager. When women had a bigger role than men in 14
Number of ornamental species per homegarden
Woman Man Both El Aguila Las Delicias El Hular
+
Number of total species per homegarden Fig. 9 Number of ornamental plant species in relation to the total species number in homegardens (HG), of three villages in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico). G main manager is given by the different
Number of food species per homegarden
shapes. The datapoint indicated by the arrow is the only HG where the man was a passionate fan of ornamental plants.
Woman Man Both
+
Number of total species per homegarden Fig. 10 Number of food plant species in relation to the total species number in the studied homegardens in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico). manager is given by the different shapes.
the management, homegardens (HG) tended to have a higher diversity and abundance of ornamental species. Ornamental species within the HG of families with relatively comfortable standard of living
t and
species of the Araceae and Maranthaceae families or some distinct horticulture cultivars was much of the time a reflection of a comfortable standard of living. This was particularly seen in El Aguila and to a lesser degree in Las Delicias, where various families seemed to have incomes superior to the others. 4.2. Food plants To many interviewees, having plants in the HG so as not do to buy fruit was the second justification, after brightening up the house with ornamental plants; although in the lifetime of a HG, fruit trees were planted first. Tree and shrub species used for food represented 60 % of the 126 food species, while herbaceous and climbing plants accounted for respectively, 30 and 10 % of the total. Species native to Mexico were prevailing (45 %) as compared to Asiatic species (27 %) while the rest were in descending order from: Central and South America, Europe and Africa. Fruits followed by leaves were the plant parts most used with 75 and 30 species, respectively. Fourteen species were used for their seeds; but notably, staple food species such as Zea mays L. and Phaseolus vulgaris L. were rarely found (maize was cultivated in 8 HG). Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott was the species most often cultivated of the eight tuber species. Seven species were used for their edible flowers, the most common were: Calathea macrosepala K. Schum. and Chamaedorea tepejilote Liebm.. Proportion of food species per HG was superior to 45 % in sixteen HG; seven of them were from El Aguila, while five and four HG were respectively, from El Hular and Las Delicias. The two HG with the highest number of ornamental species (both 90 species, one in Las Delicias and one in El Aguila) had less than 20 % of food species (with low abundances). Contrary to the trend found with ornamental species, the number of food species did not rise so clearly and proportionately in relation to the total species number (Fig.10). It seemed that when a man was the main manager, or was as equally involved as the woman, the number of food species increased. The most frequent food species in each village were different, in particular in the case of trees and shrubs (Table 7). It is important to note that of the most cultivated tree and shrub species, only three were native to Mexico. Fruit trees and shrubs made up less than 30 % of the total HG diversity for more than half of the 55 HG, and for six of them it was superior to 45 %. Tree and shrub abundance was rarely superior to five individuals, except for coffee for which it was common to find more than 20 individuals in the 15
Table 7 Food plants most frequently cultivated in the homegardens of the studied villages in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico) El Hular (n=8) % of HG El Aguila (n=24) % of HG Las Delicias (n=23) % of HG
Fruit trees and shrubs Coffea arabica L. *Citrus aurantiifolia (Chr.) Swi. *Musa spp. Citrus aurantium L.
83 67 58 50
*Mangifera indica L. *Coco nucifera L. Citrus aurantiifolia *Annona muricata L. Musa spp.
87 82 74 70 65
Nephelium lappaceum L. Theobroma cacao L. Coffea robusta L. Linden Coco nucifera L. *Psidium guajava L.
100 88 88 88 88
74 70 57 57
Chenopodium ambrosioides Capsicum annum L. Crotalaria longirostrata
75 75 63
Vegetables, aromatic plants Chenopodium ambrosioides L. *Capsicum annum L. Sechium edule (Jacq.) Sw. Chamaedorea tepejilote Liebm.
83 67 58 50
Piper sanctum (Miq.) Schltdl. Capsicum annum L. Crotalaria longirostrata Chenopodium ambrosioides L.
Hook. & Arn.
Solanum americanum Mill. *
n= number of inventoried homegardens (HG); Tree species found in more than 50 % of the total (55 HG)
Chenopodium ambrosioides L. - Psidium guajava L. Piper auritum Kunth
- Tradescantia zebrina Heynh. - Mirabilis jalapa L. - Sedum morganianum E. Walther
Aloe vera (L.) Burm. f. - Ocimum spp. - Ruta graveolens L. - Hamelia patens Jacq. F+M
M
O+M
LF+M
W+M
Fig. 11 Proportions of medicinal plants used exclusively or secondarily for home remedies in the studied homegardens in the Soconusco region. (are cited only the more frequently used plants). M = Medicinal; F = Food; O = Ornamental; LF = Live Fence; W = Wood
Leaves Fruits Flowers Stems Latex Bracts 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
Pourcentage of the medicinal species (Total = 75 species) Fig. 12 Plant organs used for the preparation of home remedies in the studied homegardens in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico)
50
homegarden (HG). In El Aguila and El Hular where coffee was cultivated on a small scale in 63 % of the HG for each, coffee was often the only cash crop derived from the HG. Other fruit trees like rambutan, mango and some citrus fruits were sold in small quantities from one HG in each El Hular and Las Delicias. Their fruit tree densities were respectively 392 and 219 trees per ha. The fruit tree densities of the other HG varied widely, from 110 to 1382 trees per ha. 4.3. Home remedy plants Considering together the three villages, 75 species of 43 families were used for home remedies (listed in Appendix 5). Number of species per HG varied from two to twenty and 89 % of the HG used less than 15 species. For each village, the percentage of medicinal plants was inferior to 20 %. At the scale of HG, high variations were noted, going from two to twenty species i.e. 2 % to 32 % of the total plants per HG. The Lamiaceae were slightly predominant with six species (various varieties and more than two species of the genus Ocimum and Mentha were distinguished in the field, further identifications are needed), compared with species of Asteraceae and Verbanaceae both with five species. The majority were native to Mexico (63 %) followed by 18 % from Asia, 7 % from Europe and two species from Africa and two from South America. The majority of the species had been planted and ten of them were considered as weeds, but tolerated. Plants exclusively cultivated for medicinal purpose were slightly less represented than plants used primarily for food (Fig.11). Leaves were the plant part most often used; buds, fruits and other parts were used rarely (Fig.12). The use of two or three parts of the same species, or a mixture of various plants species was not frequent. The ten most frequently used species are presented in Table 8, with details about the illness they cure and the way of administration. Aloe vera (L.) Burm. f. was the most used species and had also the most diverse medicinal applications. Home remedy plants were most often used to cure stomach and respiratory illnesses. Cultural Ruta graveolens L. was the species most mentioned to cure such diseases (three of the four cultural diseases). Like previously seen with the ornamental species, when a woman was the main gardener, HG had higher number of home remedies species than when it was a man. Interviewees mainly acquired their home remedy species by gifts and exchanges between friends. Proportions of home remedy species did not seem to rise proportionally with the age of the interviewees.
16
Table 8 Ten most frequently used home remedy plants found in the studied homegardens (HG) in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico) Scientific name
Spanish name
Part(s) used
Administration
Claimed medicinal use (s)
Aloe vera (L.) Burm. f.
Sábila
Leaves (pulpa)
- External application
- Inflamed wounds, spots, hair loss, thorn stuck in skin (warmed pulp), variz
"
- Mixture with orange or pineapple juice
- Gastritis, colic, inflamed stomach, kidney pain
- Placed at the entrance of the house (often with red ribbon) - Infusion
- To bring good luck, to prevent anger entering the house (other plant species were also observed with the red ribbon) - Stomach pains, painful menstruations, worms, salmonellosis
- Crushed, ext. appli.
Whole plant
Source (main) Gifts*
Nb of HG 36
Gifts
30
Chenopodium ambrosioides L.
Epazote
Leaves
Mentha spp.
Hierba buena Albahaca
Leaves
Infusion
- Wounds Diarrhea, stomach pains, flu
Gifts, bought
26
Leaves
- Infusion
- Stomach pains, cough, colic, chest pains
Gifts, bought
20
Whole plant Leaves
- Ext. appli.
-B de ojo )
Infusion
C
Gift, bought
19
Ocimum spp.
Ruta graveolens L. Psidium guajava L. Cymbopogon citratus (DC.) Stapf Verbena spp. Hamelia patens Jacq. Tagetes erecta L.
Ruda
evil eye ( mal
Guayaba
Leaves
Infusion
, stomach pains Diarrhea, stomach pains, colic, spots (cleansing)
Té de limon
Leaves
Infusion
Cough, flu, stomach pains
Verbena Cancer, Coralillo Flor de muerto
Leaves Leaves
Infusion Infusion
Leaves
- Infusion (bath for skin eruption) - Infusion
Temperature, stomach pains, diarrhea, dysentery, diabetes Inflammations, menstruations, kidney pain, wounds, possession -S salmonellosis, eyesight - Headache, temperature
Flowers
*For each plants, gifts includes also exchanges between homegardens
Spontaneous, 18 gifts Bought 16 Gifts, bought Spontaneous
16 14
Gifts
13
DISCUSSION -
-
The taxonomic composition of the studied homegardens (HG) in the Soconusco region was relatively diverse if compared to other Mexican studies; altogether 490 species were listed, 60 % of the HG had more than 50 species and two villages had each more than 330 species listed. Moreover, species composition was relatively heterogeneous between HG of a same village. In one village, also within the Soconusco region, Gasco (2008) found 240 species with an average of 64 species per HG (12 studied HG). Volg et al. (2002) who studied 30 HG in the state of Palenque found 241 species. The present study stands out from the others due to the low proportion of native species (43 %) and the high number of species used exclusively as ornamentals, which accounted for 41 % of the total richness. The number of ornamental species was superior to the number of food species in more than half of the studied HG. Low densities could also be added because in the majority of our studied HG, tree and shrub densities were inferior to 500 individuals per ha. In Tabasco, HG < 1000 m2 in size had an average of 798.1 trees and shrubs per ha (Van der Wal & Bongers, 2012). A study in India argues that lower tree and shrub densities and high numbers of ornamental plants in HG, are a result of modernization (Peyre et al., 2006). In the Soconusco region, a combination of various factors might be involved, such as: gardener gender, family economy, investment in grocery shops, and government allowances (Table 9). Several interviewees complemented their incomes by selling industrial foods, which leave less time to work in the HG and might push them to consume those products rather than cultivating their
allowances for food expenses, thus, here again, people are encouraged to buy their food instead of cultivating it. The field work for this study was carried out in a short period and at HG for at least a full year to get a real measure of the food plant diversity. Moreover, cultivars and varieties of plants were not listed, yet, intraspecific diversity as an important parameter of the HG should also be evaluated. The proportion of medicinal species was much lower than in the study of Gasco (2008), where 35 % of the species were medicinal while in our case it did not reach 20 % in any of the three villages. One of the reasons could be that she interviewed more elderly people but several of our interviewees with an age superior to 70 years old, stated that they had less knowledge of the use of medicinal plants than their ancestors. Various weeds were identified, 17
Table 9 Factors that might influence the use of plants in the studied homegardens in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico). The negative influences (-), the positive effects (+) and shaded cells where influences could not been determined
Female gardener Male gardener Domestic animals (free ranging) Grocery shops (mainly foods, sometimes medicines) Changes in food habits Cheap vegetables sold by mobile sellers Government allowances Commercial plot with a diversity of food plants Agronomists in the family or working circle Low knowledge of agroecological management Family relatives living in cities Comfortable standard of living* Health clinic in the village Belief in cultural diseases
Food
Ornamental
Medicinal
+ + -
+ -
+ -
+ + +
Families were associated with comfortable standard of living when several of the following features were observed: presence of several household appliances and cars, children working in big cities or in the United States of America, size and number of buildings, other economic activities (grocery shop, working wife, and sell of ornamental species).
but not listed (because none of the interviewees used them) and were found in the literature mentioned in the methodology, to be potentially medicinal plants. Thus, it seems that medicinal knowledge is being lost, particularly in the case of weedy species, which accounted for 13 % of our total medicinal species (extending the time period of the survey might increase it); a study in the Valley of Tehuacán-Cuicatlán found that only 6.5 % of the medicinal species were cultivated (Blanckaert et al., 2004). Other factors such as the gender of the main gardener, the selling of medicines in grocery shops, and the existence of a clinic, seemed to contribute to different degrees to a lesser use of medicinal plants (cf. Table 9). Pest management apart from ants was practically non-existent; various interviewees lucky study on Guatemalan HF reveals that a major constraint to HG development is the lack of a knowledge base for the selection and resowing of food plants (Zuleta et al., 2008). This was observed in the studied villages, where several of the interviewees (as well as noninterviewees) were asking for pest control products, seeds and grafted trees. Beside, interviewees who have agronomists in their family or through their job, seem to have easier access to plant material (e.g. seeds, pesticides) and to the knowledge associated to it. Although categorized as rural villages, interviewees had homegardens similar to urban homegardens that have high proportions of ornamental plants. Ornamental plants seemed to play an important social role for women, in particular in rural villages where they spend most of the day at home, while men work in the commercial plot; cultivating ornamental plants might enable them to express their personality, to socialize with neighbors and in some cases to earn some money. Comparisons between villages and relations between homegardens and commercial crops The plant composition and the proportion of species in the three categories of uses were relatively similar between the three villages, although the small sample in El Hular, was not sufficient to make solid comparisons. However, several biophysical and socio-economic factors can be proposed to explain some of the variations observed. The mid-temperate climate of El Aguila probably explains the high number of species exclusively found in this village, as well as its higher diversity. Plants from temperate and tropical climates were both found in El Aguila, though with a lower number of tree species than in Las Delicias. Its soil of volcanic origin and its higher elevation might also have positively affected plant diversity. Quiroz et al. (2002) found in Venezuela that the highest diversity in homegardens was found within the intermediate zone (600-1326 m.a.s.l). Elevation is also likely to explain some of the differences in the plant family distribution 18
between the three villages. In El Aguila, the number of species of Orchidaceae and Bromeliaceae species was higher than in the two other villages. These families have mainly epiphyte species; thus, El Aguila with its altitude superior to 1200 m had, in general more favourable conditions than had the two others. In fact, Wolf & Flamenco-S (2003) found that the epiphyte diversity in Chiapas was the highest between 500 and 2000 m of altitude.Several epiphyte species were transferred from the commercial plots or from the native vegetation to the homegardens. Thus, the important damages in the natural environment from large scale and intensive agriculture in the surrounding of Las Delicias, could also explain, its lower diversity of Orchidaceae species than in the two other villages. In only a few cases, food plants from the cocoa and coffee plots were also transferred to the homegardens. This might be due to the work division between man and woman as mentioned above, as well as, the larger size and better fertility conditions of the commercial plots. The majority of the coffee and cocoa trees in the region are cultivated with various species of trees and plants, which may also serve to diversify food, medicinal and timber products within the plots (Salgado et al., 2007; Soto-Pinto et al., 2007; Quique, 2011). Thus, it might be that the majority of the people in El Hular and El Aguila tend to use more the plant diversity within their cocoa or coffee agroforest as a source of fruits, vegetables and timbers, rather than the species cultivated in the homegardens. Moreover, comestible weeds were often collected from the agroforests, whereas this was not possible in the sugarcane fields where herbicides are intensively used (spread by plane). There is little evidence that the inhabitants in Las Delicias, that have commercial plots with only sugarcane, grow higher food diversity in their homegardens that the inhabitants of El Aguila and El Hular. But here again, a three months study is too short to make solid affirmations and it would have been necessary to characterize the diversity of the commercial plots. All the interviewees excepting several in Las Delicias used the leaf litter from the commercial plot to fertilize their plants, in particular for the sowing of the numerous ornamental plants in containers. The reverse was also seen, i.e. some interviewees transferred organic wastes from their homegardens to their commercial plots. Compost was made in very few homegardens, and the majority of the household residues were given to the domestic animals and very often dead leaves were either burned or swept. The application of natural processes and the low use of external inputs are often key factors mentioned to describe homegarden management (Torquebiau, 1992; Kumar & Nair, 2004). However, in the study, these two characteristics were rarely found, casting doubts upon their sustainability, as well as their subsistence role given the low proportion of food and medicinal species. 19
CONCLUSION The homegardens in this study appeared to contribute little to the alimentation and health of the families concerned, despite the relatively high number of plant species. Higher numbers of ornamental plants than food plants, low proportions of native species and low abundances of tree and shrub species, as well as high use of external inputs, were observed in a majority of homegardens. Knowledge and use of native medicinal and food plants were minimal. The prior subsistence role of the homegarden is thus being replaced by an aesthetic function. Homegardens of families with a relatively comfortable standard of living, as compared to other families in these villages, and those with women as the main gardener were frequently the ones with the highest proportion of ornamental plants. In each village, homegardens and the commercial plots were connected by exchanges of species and organic materials. Ornamental plants and leaf litter were the elements most transferred from commercial plots to homegardens, in particular in the village of the coffee farmers, in which, epiphytic species were also extracted in greatest number than in the two other villages, due to a more favourable climate, its higher altitude and to an agroecosystem (agroforests) that enable them to survive. It seemed that for various interviewees, homegardens had mainly an aesthetic role, while they used their commercial plot to obtain food plants and timber for self-consumption. Considering the high number of exotic plants (used in particularly as ornamental plants) and the scarcity of studies on plant invasiveness in Mexico (Villaseñor & EspinosaGarcia, 2004), further studies should be considered in relation to the numerous ornamental plants used in the homegardens. The study and promotion of native species and varieties along with training about their uses and management would be essential to prevent their loss. In order to study the transformation of homegardens within the context of the global changes that are affecting rural villages, further research is needed to analyze how socioeconomic and cultural factors impact upon homegarden management and agrobiodiversity. The ecological state of the agricultural matrix in which homegardens are found should also be considered, in order to design effective conservation strategies for homegardens surrounded by low diversity agroecosystems. The Soconusco region has received very little attention concerning its homegardens; however this region is going through a process of rural transformation and it would be very interesting to study the influences of those changes on the structure and function of homegardens.
20
First I would like to thank all the interviewees and their family that welcomed me to their homegardens. In El Hular I particularly thank Francisca, her husband Carlos and son Lidier, without forgetting: Anna Luiza, Carmen, Cristino, Irma and her husband Roselva, Maria L., and Maria V.. In Las Delicias, many thanks to Asuncion, Maria R. and José, as well as: Alicia, Alicia C., Amanda, Antonia, Carolina, Clotilda, Gaby, Irma, Josepha, Luiza, Maria F., Maricela, Marina, Natividad, Rosa, Sandra, Sandra R., Marta, Yiadera and her mother. In El Aguila, many thanks to Xochil, Eleazar and Adan, as well as: Alva, Amadeo , Carolina, Conception, Delma, Dina, Eastelia, Efren, Elsa, Esmeralda, Evelia, Gaby, Laeti, Margarita, Maria, Myriam, Orelia, Regina, Reina, and Romulo. I express my gratitude to my first supervisor, Anne Damon, for the opportunity she gave me in realizing this thesis and to have taken time to revise the manuscript. I also express my gratitude to my second supervisor: Lorena Soto, who in spite of the distance was always presents to give comments and encouragements. I thank Carlos Avendaño and Alexander Mendoza from the INIFAP (National Institute of Forest, Agricultural and livestock Research) who introduced me to the villagers of El Hular and gave me very useful advices. I am also grateful to all the staff of ECOSUR, in particular the ones of the Herbarium: Oliva Godínez-Ibarra, Rubén García, and René. Finally, I want to thank my family and friends, who in spite of the distance are always there to encourage me.
BIBLIOGRAPHY Aguirre Pineda F & Rosette Castro JC. 2010. Política Institucional en Seguridad Alimentaria (proyección del PESA 2011San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Chiapas, Mexico, 1/09/2010. Turrialba, Costa Rica: Centro agronómico tropical de investigación y enseñanza (CATIE). 37 p. Alvarez-Buylla ME, Chavero E, García-Barrios JR. 1989. Homegardens of a humid tropical region in Southeas xample of an agroforestry cropping system in a recently established community. Agroforestry Systems 8: 133-156. Ayala Vargas HD. 2006. Le Ik. Los Chiles de Guatemala. Guatemala, Guatemala: Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala, Facultad de Agronomía. 117 p. Barthelemy D, Grondin P, Pibot A, Van Cauwenberghe T. 2007. Caractères végétatifs et reconnaissance de familles botaniques tropicales. Montpellier, France : École nationale du génie rural, des eaux et des forêts. 155 p. Bartra A. 1995. Origen y claves del sistema finquero del Soconusco. [In line] , (15/02/2012) Belcher B, Michon G, Angelsen A, Ruiz M, Rez PI, Asbjornsen H. 2005. The socioeconomic conditions determining the development, persistence, and decline of forest garden systems. Economic Botany 59: 245-253. Bello EF. 2010. La producción agropecuaria en el Soconusco e intercambio con Centroamerica. In: José E. Sánchez, Ramón Jarquín, eds. La frontera sur. Reflexiones sobre el Soconusco, Chiapas, y sus problemas ambientales, poblacionales y productivos. Tapachula, Mexico: El Colegio de la Frontera Sur, COCYTECH. 185200. Blanckaert I, Swennen R, Paredes Flores M, Rosas López R, Lira Saade R. 2004. Floristic composition, plant uses and management practices in homegardens of San Rafael Coxcatlán, Valley of Tehuacán-Cuicatlán, Mexico. Journal of Arid Environments 57: 179-202. Caballero J. 1992. Maya homegardens: past, present and future. Ethnoecologia I: 35-54. Castillo A, Corral Verdugo V, González Gaudiano E, Paré L, Fernanda Paz M, Reyes J, Schteingart M. 2009. Conservación y sociedad. In: Capital natural de México. Vol. II: Estado de conservación y tendencias de cambio. D.F.,Mexico: CONABIO. 761-801. Chavero E, Alvarez-Buylla ME. 1988. Ethnobotany in a tropical-humid region: the home gardens of Balzapote, Veracruz, Mexico. Journal of Ethnobiology 8: 45-79. Colunga- García Marín P & Zizumbo-Villarreal D. 2004. Domestication of plants in Maya lowlands. Economic Botany. 58: 101-110. CONEVAL (El Consejo Nacional de Evaluación de la Política de Desarrollo Social). 2010. Índice de Rezago Social 2010 a nivel municipal y por localidad. [In line] , (05/03/2012).
Corzo Márquez AR & Shwartz NB. 2008. Traditional Home Gardens Of Petén, Guatemala: Resource Management, Food Security, And Conservation. Journal of Ethnobiology 28(2): 305-317. Corzo Ornelas L. 2004. Análisis de la pobreza y la migración de atracción guatemalteca en Chiapas. [In line] , (6/02/2012). De Clerck F, Negreros-Castillo P. 2000. Plant species of traditional Mayan homegardens of Mexico as analogs for multistrata agroforests. Agroforestry Systems 48: 303-317. Dewey KG. 1981. Nutritional consequences of the transformation from subsistence to commercial agriculture in Tabasco, Mexico. Human Ecology 9: 151-187. Díaz Santana PT. 2011. Sustentabilidad de huertos familiares en la comunidad de Tziscao, La Trinitaria, Chiapas. Maste la Frontera Sur. 96 p. FAO. 1998. FRA 2000: Terms and Definitions Working Paper 1. Forest Resources Assessment Programme 2000 (FRA 2000). Forestry Department, Rome. 20 p. [In line] , (15/03/2012). Fernandes ECM, Nair PKR. 1986. An evaluation of the structure and function of tropical homegardens. Agroforestry Systems 21: 279-310. Galluzzi G, Eyzaguirre P, Negri V. 2010. Home gardens: neglected hotspots of agrobiodiversity and cultural diversity. Biodiversity and Conservation 19: 3635-3654. Gasco J. 2008 Chiapas, Mexico. Journal of Ethnobiology 28: 259-277. González Jácome A. 2007. Agroecosistemas mexicanos: pasado y presente. Itinerarios 6: 5580. Heindorf C. 2011. Analysis of the agrobiodiversity of home gardens in the tropical regions of Mexico. thesis. San Luis Potosí, Mexico: Autonomous University of San Luis Potosí. 179 p. Hernández Sánchez M. 2010. Cambios y continuidades en los solares mayas yucatecos. Un análisis intergeneracional de su configuración espacial en dos comunidades del sur de Merida, Mexico: Centro de investigación y de estudios avanzados del instituto politécnico nacional. 181 p. Hernández Xolocotzi E. 2008. El concepto de etnobotánica. In: Barrera A, ed. La etnobotánica: tres puntos de vista y una perspectiva. Chapingo, Mexico: Universidad autónoma Chapingo, 6-9. Howard P. 2006. Gender and social dynamics in swidden and homegardens in Latin America. In: Kumar BM, Nair PKR, eds. Tropical Homegardens: A Time-Tested Example of Sustainable Agroforestry. Netherlands: Springer, 159-182. INEGI (Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática). 2010. Censo de Población y Vivienda 2010. Principales resultados por localidad. (ITER). [In line]. , (05/03/2012).
Kehlenbeck K, Arifin H, Maass B. 2007. Plant diversity in homegardens in a socio-economic and agro-ecological context. In: Tscharntke T, Leuschner C, Zeller M, Guhardja E, Bidin A, eds. The stability of tropical rainforest margins, linking ecological, economic and social constraints of land use and conservation. Verlag Berlin: Springer, 297-319. Kumar BM, Nair PKR. 2004. The enigma of tropical homegardens. Agroforestry Systems 61: 135-152. Lafaye De Micheaux P, Drouilhet R, Liquet B. 2010. Le logiciel R, maitriser le langage, effectuer des analyses statistiques Springer, 2010 (Software: R Package, Le Logiciel R, version 1.0). Landon-Lane C. 2004. Livelihoods grow in gardens. Diversifying rural incomes through home gardens. Rome Agricultural Support Systems Division. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 47 p. Macías Sámano JE, Ochoa Gaona S, Zamora Cornelio LF, Martinez Icó M, Peters Grether W, López Urbina H. 2012. Guía de campo para la identificación de los principales árboles de la vertiente pacífico de Chiapas. Unpublished. 226 p. Magurran AE. 2004. Measuring biological diversity. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. 256 p. Manzanero Medina G, Flores Martinez A, Hunn ES. 2009. Los huertos familiares zapotecos de San Miguel Talea de Castro, Sierra Norte de Oaxaca, México. Etnobiología 7: 929. Matuda E. 1950. A Contribution to Our Knowledge of the Wild and Cultivated Flora of Chiapas. I. Districts Soconusco and Mariscal. American Midland Naturalist 44(3). 513-616. Montagnini F. 2006. Homegardens of Mesoamerica: biodiversity, food security, and nutrient management. In: Kumar BM, Nair PKR, eds. Tropical Homegardens: A Time-Tested Example of Sustainable Agroforestry. Netherlands: Springer, 61 84. Nair PKR. 2006. Whither homegardens? In: Kumar BM, Nair PKR, eds. Tropical Homegardens: A Time-Tested Example of Sustainable Agroforestry. Netherlands: Springer, 355-370. Nair PKR & Kumar BM. 2006. Introduction. In: Kumar BM, Nair PKR, eds. Tropical Homegardens: A Time-Tested Example of Sustainable Agroforestry. Netherlands: Springer, 1-10. Narváez H. 2001. La fundación del Ingenio Azúcarero de Huixtla. [In line]. http://www.periodistasenlinea.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=arti cle&sid=3306>, (18/02/2012). Neulinger K, Vogl CR, Alayón Gamboa JA. 2009. Ethnobotanic Examination of Tropical Home Gardens in Calakmul, Campeche, Mexico. In: Tielkes E, ed. Biophysical and socio-economic frame conditions for the sustainable management of natural resources: International research on food security, natural resource management and rural development. Book of Abstracts, Tropentag 2009. Hamburg: Print & Mail (PRIMA), 91-91.
Ogata N. 2003. Domestication and distribution of chocolate tree (Theobroma cacao L.) in Mesoamerica. In: Gomez-Pompa A, Allen ME, Fedick SL, Jimenez-Osornio JJ, eds. The Lowland Maya area. Three millennia at the human-wildland interface. Binghampton, New York, USA: The Haworth Press Inc, 415-438. Pennington TD, Sarukhán J. 2005. Árboles Tropicales de México. 3rd ed. DF, Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Fondo de Cultura Económica, 523 p. Perea Mercado S. 2012. La diversidad vegetal en solares y el empoderamiento de mujeres en comunidades aledañas a la reserva de la biosfera Calakmul. In: Jesús M. Ascencio Rivera y Georgina Vargas Simón. VIII Congreso Mexicano de Etnobiología: El conocimento traditional: Presente y Futuro de los Pueblos, Villahermaosa, Mexico, 23-27/04/2012. Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco. CDROM. Perfecto I, Vandermeer J. 2008. Biodiversity conservation in tropical agroecosystems: a new conservation paradigm. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1134: 173-200. Peyre A, Guidal A, Wiersum KF, Bongers F. 2006. Dynamics of homegarden structure and function in Kerala, India. Agroforestry Systems 66: 101-115. Pineda AF. 2006. Flora útil. Etnobotánica de Nicaragua. Managua: MARENA. 352 p. Pohlan Jürgen HA, Toledo Toledo E, Galán Leyva A, Marroquín Agreda F. 2005. Manejo agroecológico de la caña de azúcar (Saccharum spp.) en el Soconusco, Chiapas, México. III Congresso Brasileiro de Agroecologia, 17-20/10/2005 Florianópolis/SC. [In line], , (25/03/2012). Poot Pool WS. 2008. Arquitectura, estructura y composición específica de solares y medios de vida de productores de mayores y menores capitales en Pomuch, Campeche. Villahermosa, Mexico: El Colegio de la Frontera Sur. 141 p. Quique R. 2011. Caractérisation de la diversité arborée des agroforêts à cacaoyers du Soconusco (Chiapas, Mexique). Montpellier, France, University Montpellier 2. 59 p. Quiroz C, Gutiérrez M, Rodríguez D, Pérez D, Ynfante J, Gámez J, Pérez de Fernandez T, Marques A, Pacheco W. 2002. Home gardens and in situ conservation of agrobiodiversity-Venezuelan component. In: Watson JW & Eyzaguirre PB, eds. Proceedings of the Second International Home Gardens Workshop: Contribution of home gardens to in situ conservationof plant genetic resources in farming systems,1719 July 2001, Witzenhausen, Federal Republic of Germany. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome. 73-82. Ramírez-Marcial N, Camacho-Cruz A, Martínez-Icó M, Luna-Gómez A, Golicher D, González Espinosa M. 2010. Árboles y arbustos de los bosques de montaña en Chiapas. México, San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Mexico: ECOSUR. 244 p. Rico-Gray VR, Garcia-franco JG, Chemas A. 1990. Species Composition, Similarity, and Structure of Mayan Homegardens in Tixpeual and Tixcacaltnyub, Yucatan, Mexico. Economic Botany 44: 470 487. Rosenswig RM. 2006. Sedentism and food production in early complex societies of the Soconusco, Mexico. World Archaeology 38: 330-355.
Salgado-Mora MG, Ibarra-Núñez G, Macías-Sámano JE, López-Báez O. 2007. Diversidad arbórea en cacaotales del Soconusco, Chiapas, México. Interciencia 32: 743- 768. Santacruz León EE, Villalba EP, Santacruz De León G, Palacio Muñoz, VH. 2008. La producción platanera y la reorganización del territorio en el soconusco, Chiapas. [In line] . (18/02/2012). Santacruz León EE. 2007. Las transformaciones económicas de la agricultura de exportación del Soconusco, en la segunda mitad del siglo XX. Phd dissertation. Centro de Investigaciones Económicas, Sociales y Tecnológicas de la Agroindustria y la Agricultura Mundial (CIESTAM), Universidad Autónoma Chapingo, Mexico. 239 p. SEDESOL (Secretaría de Desarrollo Social). 2012. Guía rápida 2012 de los programas de la Secretaría de Desarrollo Social. SEDESOL. Mexico. 132 p. Soto-Pinto L, Villalvazo-López V, Jiménez-Ferrer G, Ramírez-Marcial N, Montoya G, Sinclair F. 2007. The role of local knowledge in determining shade composition of multistrata coffee systems in Chiapas, Mexico. Biodiversity and Conservation 16(2): 419-436. Torquebiau E. 1992 207.
Science 41: 189-
Van der Wal H, Bongers F. 2012. Biosocial and bionumerical diversity of variously sized home gardens in Tabasco, Mexico. Agroforestry Systems. Advance online publication. DOI: 10.1007/s10457-012-9526-4. Velázquez JR, Colín PS, García GJ. 2009. Frutos y semillas de árboles tropicales de México. 1st ed. D.F., Mexico: Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, Instituto Nacional de Ecología (INE-SEMARNAT). 123 p. Villaseñor JL & Espinosa-Garcia FJ. 2004. The alien flowering plants of Mexico. Diversity and Distributions 10: 113-123. Viqueira JP. 1997. Régions métisses et régions indiennes au Chiapas central. Essai de chronotopologie. Cahiers des Amériques Latines 25: 5-26. Vogl CR, Vogl-Lukasser B, Caballero J. 2002. Homegardens of Maya Migrants in the District of Palenque (Chiapas/Mexico): Implications for Sustainable Rural Development. In: Stepp JR, Wyndham FS, Zarger R.K, eds. Ethnobiology and Biocultural Diversity. Athens, Georgia, USA: University of Georgia Press. 631-647. Wiersum K. 2006. Diversity and change in homegarden cultivation in Indonesia. Tropical Homegardens: 13-24. Wolf JHD & Flamenco-S A. 2003. Patterns in species richness and distribution of vascular epiphytes in Chiapas, Mexico. Journal of Biogeography 30: 1689 1707. Zuleta C, Jiménez López J, Chávez Toledo A. 2008. Percepciones, conocimientos y prácticas sobre huertos familiares en comunidades rurales de Huehuetenango y Chimaltenango. Formative research informe. 39 p. [In line]. . (20/02/2012).
Appendix 1 List of domesticated animals in the studied homegardens (HG) Family Anatidae Anatidae Anatidae
Species Anser anser Cairina moschata Dendrocygna autumnalis
Apidae
Apis melifera
Apidae Bovidae Canidae Columbidae Cracidae Felidae Leporidae Phasianidae Phasianidae Phasianidae Phasianidae Procyonidae Psittacidae Psittacidae Psittacidae Sciuridae
Meliponia sp. Ovis aries (doméstica) Canis familiaris Ortalis leucogastra Felis catus Gallus gallus Meleagris gallopavo Meleagris sp. Pavo cristatus Procyon sp. Amazona albifrons Amazona autumnalis
Local name Ganso Pato Pichichi Abeja meliponia Abeja Borrego Perro Paloma Chachalacas Gato Conejo Pollo Pavo Guajolote Pavo Mapache Cotorro Loro Cucha Ardilla Pacha
% of HG 2 11 4 4 2 2 56 4 4 20 2 71 2 4 2 2 9 11 7 5 2
Appendix 2 List of the spontaneous species inventoried in the homegardens, with their uses F = food; M = Medicinal; O = Ornamental; T = Tools Family Amaranthaceae Amaranthaceae Apicaceae Asclepiadaceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Cleomaceae Crassulaceae Euphorbiaceae Lamiaceae Malvaceae Malvaceae Meliaceae Passifloraceae Phytolaccaceae Polygonaceae Rubiaceae Solanaceae Solanaceae Solanaceae Verbenaceae
Species Amaranthus hybridus L. Amaranthus spinosus L. Eryngium foetidum L. Asclepias curassavica L. Ageratum conyzoides L. Heliotropium indicum L. Cleome pilosa Benth. Kalanchoe pinnata (Lam.) Pers. Jatropha gossypiifolia L. Ocimum spp. Guazuma ulmifolia Lam.
Use F SU F O M M M M M M M T Sida rhombifolia L. (broom) « Cauchte » M Passiflora foetida L. F Petiveria alliacea L. M Antigonon leptopus Hook. & Arn. O Hamelia patens Jacq. M Lycianthes heteroclita (Sendtn.) Bitter C Solanum americanum Mill. F+M Solanum rudepannum Dunal M Lantana urticifolia Mill. (syn. Lantana camara fo. urticifolia M (Mill.) I.E.Méndez) « Pata de paloma » F
Village (s) ADH AD ADH D A D D DA HD D DH D D D A D DH AH ADH ADH D A
Appendix 3 Tree and shrub species inventoried in the homegardens (without species exclusively used as ornamental) Nat. = Native to Mexico; Af. = Africa; As. = Asia; CSA = Central & South America; A = El Aguila; D = Las Delicias; H = El Hular; S= Shrub; T= Tree Family Solanaceae Rutaceae Musaceae Anacardiaceae Rubiaceae Arecaceae Myrtaceae Annonaceae Lauraceae Fabaceae Caricaceae Rubiaceae Sapindaceae Malvaceae Bignoniaceae Annonaceae Malpighiaceae Rutaceae Rutaceae Anacardiaceae Rutaceae Solanaceae Sapotaceae Rubiaceae Arecaceae Chrysobalanaceae Rubiaceae Rutaceae Malvaceae Bixaceae Euphorbiaceae Lythraceae Cactaceae Myrtaceae Fabaceae Sapotaceae Fabaceae Fabaceae Sapindaceae Muntingiaceae Sapotaceae Meliaceae Oxalidaceae Solanaceae Meliaceae Solanaceae Phyllanthaceae Fabaceae Rutaceae Euphorbiaceae Bignoniaceae Rosaceae Anacardiaceae Annonaceae
Species Capsicum annum L. Citrus aurantiifolia (Christm.) Swingle Musa spp. Mangifera indica L. Ixora coccinea L. Coco nucifera L. Psidium guajava L. Annona muricata L. Persea americana Mill. Crotalaria longirostrata Hook. & Arn. Carica papaya L. Coffea arabica L. Nephelium lappaceum L. Theobroma cacao L. Tabebuia pentaphylla (L.) Hemsl. Annona diversifolia Saff. Byrsonima crassifolia (L.) Kunth Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck Citrus reticulata Blanco Spondias mombin L. Citrus × aurantium L. Lycianthes heteroclita (Sendtn.) Bitter Manilkara zapota (L.) P. Royen Morinda citrifolia L. Chamaedorea tepejilote Liebm. Chrysobalanus icaco L. Coffea robusta L. Linden Citrus × limon (L.) Osbeck Guazuma ulmifolia Lam. Bixa orellana L. Cnidoscolus aconitifolius ssp. aconitifolius Breckon Punica granatum L. Opuntia spp. Syzygium jambos (L.) Alston Inga inicuil Schltdl. & Cham. ex G. Don Chrysophyllum cainito L. Inga micheliana Harms Inga vera Willd. Melicoccus bijugatus Jacq. Muntingia calabura L. Pouteria sapota (Jacq.) H.E.Moore & Stearn Trichilia havanensis Jacq. Averrhoa carambola L. Capsicum pubescens Ruiz & Pav. Cedrela odorata L. Cyphomandra betacea (Cav.) Sendtn. Phyllanthus acidus (L.) Skeels Tamarindus indica L. Citrus medica L. Jatropha curcas L. Parmentiera edulis DC. Rubus sp. Anacardium occidentale L. Annona purpurea Moc. & Sessé ex Dunal
% HG 73 65 65 60 58 53 53 44 42 38 36 36 33 33 31 27 27 27 27 27 25 25 25 25 24 24 24 20 20 18 18 18 16 16 15 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 11 11 11 11 11 11 9 9 9 9 7 7
Origin Nat. As. As. As. As. As. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. Af. As. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. As. As. Nat. As. Nat. Nat. As. Nat. Nat. Af. As. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. As. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. As. Nat. Nat. CSA As. As. As. Nat. Nat. CSA Nat.
Village (s) ADH DHA DHA DHA DHA DHA ADH ADH ADH ADH ADH A DHA ADH D ADH ADH DHA DHA ADH DHA ADH ADH DHA ADH D DHA DHA ADH ADH ADH ADH ADH DHA ADH DH ADH D ADH DH ADH D DHA A ADH A DHA DHA DHA ADH ADH A DHA ADH
Growth habit S T S T S T T T T S T S T S T T T T T T T S T S S T S T T T S S S T T T T T T T T T T S T S T T T S T S T T
Lauraceae Polygonaceae Euphorbiaceae Adoxaceae Meliaceae Bignoniaceae Fabaceae Chrysobalanaceae Pinaceae Rosaceae Bignoniaceae Asteraceae Fabaceae Cecropiaceae Malvaceae Rutaceae Euphorbiaceae Clusiaceae Fabaceae Sapindaceae Malvaceae Lauraceae Myrtaceae Fabaceae Vitaceae Boraginaceae Moraceae Moraceae Burseraceae Solanaceae Rutaceae Malvaceae Fabaceae
Cinnamomum verum J. Presl Coccoloba floribunda (Benth.) Lindau Jatropha gossypiifolia L. Sambucus mexicana C. Presl ex DC. Azadirachta indica A. Juss. Crescentia alata Kunth Gliricidia sepium (Jacq.) Kunth ex Walp. Moquilea platypus Hemsl. Pinus sp. Prunus persica (L.) Batsch. Tabebuia donnell - smithii Rose Vernonia patens Kunth Andira inermis (W. Wright) Kunth ex DC. Cecropia obtusifolia Bertol. Ceiba pentandra (L.) Gaertn. Citrus maxima (Burm.) Osbeck Croton draco Schltdl. & Cham. Garcinia mangostana L. Inga laurina (Sw.) Willd. Litchi chinensis Sonn. Pachira aquatica Aubl. Persea schiedeana Nees Psidium friedrichsthalianum (O. Berg) Nied. Senna alata (L.) Roxb. Vitis vinifera L. Cordia alliodora (Ruiz & Pav.) Oken Artocarpus altilis (Parkinson) Fosberg Artocarpus heterophyllus Lam. Bursera simaruba (L.) Sarg. Capsicum chinense Casimiroa edulis La Llave & Lex. Chiranthodendron pentadactylon Larreat. Diphysa americana (Mill.) M. Sousa
7 7 7 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Malvaceae Fabaceae Myrtaceae Malvaceae Simaroubaceae Combretaceae Lauraceae Clusiaceae
Hibiscus sabdariffa L. Leucaena leucocephala (Lam.) de Wit Pimenta dioica (L.) Merr. Quararibea funebris (La Llave) Vischer Simarouba glauca Aubl. Terminalia catappa L. Laurus nobilis L. Garcinia madruno (Kunth) Hammel "Palo de agua" Cinchona officinalis L. "Tepejilote"
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Rubiaceae Arecaceae
As. Nat. Nat. Nat. As. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. As. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. As. Nat. As. Nat. As. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. Eu. Nat. As. As. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. Af. Or As. Nat. Nat. Nat. Nat. As. Eu. CSA Nat. Nat.
DH D ADH D DHA ADH ADH D A DHA H A ADH H ADH D A H ADH DHA D D D D DHA ADH D H D A A A A D D D D H H A A A A A
T T S S T T T T T T T T T T T T S T T T T T T T S T T T T S T T T S T T T T T T T T T S
Appendix 4 List of the ornamental species inventoried in the homegardens Native = Native to Mexico; CSA = Native to Central & South America (without Mexico); NA= Origin not found in the literature consulted Continent of Family Species Local name Use origin Acanthaceae Brugmansia x candida Pers. Campana CSA O+M Acanthaceae Crossandra infundibuliformis (L.) Nees Asia O Africa & Acanthaceae Justicia betonica L. Camaron/Chupete O Asia Acanthaceae Justicia brandegeeana Wassh. & L.B. Sm Camaron/Lagarto Native O Acanthaceae Justicia carnea Lindl. Plumero CSA O Acanthaceae Justicia scheidweileri V.A.W. Graham CSA O Acanthaceae Justicia spicigera Schltdl. Native O Acanthaceae Megaskepasma erythrochlamys Lindau Copete faisan CSA O Acanthaceae Pachystachys lutea Nees Camaron/ Nieve/ Pollo CSA O Pseuderanthemum carruthersii (Seem.) Acanthaceae Oceania O Guillaumin
Acanthaceae Acanthaceae Acanthaceae Acanthaceae Acanthaceae Acanthaceae Agavaceae Agavaceae Aizoaceae Amaranthaceae Amaranthaceae Amaranthaceae Amaryllidaceae Amaryllidaceae Amaryllidaceae Amaryllidaceae Amaryllidaceae Amaryllidaceae Amaryllidaceae
Ruellia brittoniana Leonard Ruellia spp. Thunbergia alata Bojer ex Sims Thunbergia erecta (Benth.) T. Anderson Thunbergia fragrans Roxb. Thunbergia grandiflora Roxb. Agave americana L. Polianthes tuberosa L. Aptenia cordifolia (L. f.) Schwantes Amaranthus sp. Celosia argentea L. Gomphrena globosa L. Agapanthus africanus (L.) Hoffmanns. Allium glandulosum Link & Otto Crinum spp. Eucharis × grandiflora Planch. & Linden Haemanthus multiflorus Martyn Hippeastrum spp. Zephyranthes carinata Herb.
Apocynaceae
Adenium obesum (Forssk.) Roem. & Schult.
Rosa del desierto/Crusita
Apocynaceae Apocynaceae Apocynaceae Apocynaceae Apocynaceae Apocynaceae Apocynaceae
Amanda/Campana Chulita/ Chula Centavo Mandevilla Laurel trinitaria Flor de cruz (mayo)
Apocynaceae
Allamanda cathartica Catharanthus roseus (L.) G. Don Ceropegia woodii Schltr. Mandevilla sanderi (Hemsl.) Woodson Nerium oleander L. Plumeria rubra L. Stapelia grandiflora Masson Tabernaemontana divaricata (L.) R. Br. ex Roem.
Apocynaceae Apocynaceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae
Thevetia ahouai A. DC. Thevetia peruviana (Pers.) K. Schum. Aglaonema commutatum Schott Aglaonema costatum N.E. Br. Alocasia cucullata (Lour.) G. Don Alocasia macrorrhizos (L.) G. Don (variegata) Alocasia micholitziana 'Frydek' Sander Alocasia plumbea Van Houtte Alocasia x amazonica Anthurium clarinervium Matuda Anthurium sp. Anthurium spp. Caladium bicolor Vent.
& Schult.
Campanita Campanita
Native NA Africa Africa Asia Asia Native Native Africa NA Native CSA Africa Native Various CSA Africa CSA Native Africa & Asia CSA Africa africa CSA Europa Native Africa
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Camelia/ Gardenia
Asia
O
Coyol de gato/Huevo de gato Chilidron
Native Native Asia Asia Asia Asia Asia Asia NA Native Native CSA CSA
O+F+M O O O O O O O O O O O O
Campana Maguey Nardo Amarante rouge Cresta de gallo/Tercio cielo Flor boton Agapenda Cebollin Reina Tasa con plata Espuma/estrella roja Bucaro Mananita
Capote/ Capote blanco
Hoja radiographia Corazon Hoja de cuero Anturio Hoja bicolor
O O O O O O O O
Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araceae Araliaceae Araliaceae Araliaceae Araliaceae Arecaceae Arecaceae Arecaceae Arecaceae Arecaceae Aristolochiaceae Asclepiadaceae Asclepiadaceae Asclepiadaceae Asparagaceae Asparagaceae Asparagaceae Asparagaceae Asparagaceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Balsaminaceae Balsaminaceae Balsaminaceae Begoniaceae Begoniaceae Begoniaceae Bignoniaceae Bromeliaceae Bromeliaceae Bromeliaceae Bromeliaceae Bromeliaceae Bromeliaceae Bromeliaceae Bromeliaceae Bromeliaceae Bromeliaceae Bromeliaceae
Caladium praetermissum 'Hilo Beauty' Dieffenbachia amoena Bull. Epipremnum aureum (Linden & André) G.S. Bunting Monstera adansonii Schott Monstera deliciosa Liebm. Philodendron bipinnatifidum Schott ex Endl. Spathiphyllum sp. Spathiphyllum wallisii Regel Syngonium podophyllum Schott Xanthosoma sagittifolium (L.) Schott Zantedeschia aethiopica (L.) Spreng. Polyscias fruticosa (L.) Harms Polyscias guilfoylei (W. Bull) L.H. Bailey Polyscias scutellaria (Burm. f.) Fosberg Schefflera arboricola (Hayata) Merr. Chamaedorea sp. Dypsis sp. Elaeis guineensis Jacq. Rhapis excelsa (Thunb.) A. Henry Sabal sp. Aristolochia sp. Asclepias curassavica L. Cryptostegia madagascariensis Bojer ex Decne. Gomphocarpus physocarpus E. Mey. Asparagus densiflorus (Kunth) Jessop Asparagus setaceus (Kunth) Jessop Chlorophytum comosum (Thunb.) Jacques Cordyline terminalis (L.) Kunth Sansevieria trifasciata Prain Aster novi-belgii L. Chrysanthemum sp. Cosmos sulphureus Cav. Dahlia pinnata Cav. Eclipta alba (L.) Hassk. Gazania sp. Helianthus annuus L. Melampodium divaricatum (Rich.) DC. Sphagneticola trilobata (L.) Pruski Tagetes erecta L. Tithonia diversifolia (Hemsl.) A. Gray Zinnia spp. Impatiens balsamina L. Impatiens niamniamensis Gilg Impatiens walleriana Hook. f. Begonia nelumbifolia Schltdl. & Cham. Begonia spp. Begonia spp. Tecoma stans (L.) Juss. ex Kunth Aechmea sp (Fasciata) Aechmea sp. Ananas nanus (L.B. Sm.) L.B. Sm. Cryptanthus spp. Tillandsia flabellata Baker Tillandsia sp. Tillandsia sp. Vriesea splendens (Brongn.) Lem.
Soldado/Hoja militaria Hoja verde Comté Enrededora Cuna de moise Cuna de moise
Alcatraz
Arbol verde de lujo Pacaya de lujo Palma ornato Palma africana Palma Palma Flor de pato
Huevo de viejito Esparago Vela de novia/ Colchon de nino Liston Silvina/ Calo de gallo/Bandera
Crysanthema/ Margarita Margarita Dalia Monte colgante Dormilona Girasol
Flor de muerto Girasol Margarita Dalia corriente China Pico del tucan Belén/ Quicerena Ala de agel Begonia Trenadora Imgp g5373 Piña ornamental Imgp 5852 Imgp 5373 Imgp 5378 Imgp 5381 Imgp 5835 Imgp 5852
NA Native Asia Native Native CSA NA CSA Native CSA Africa Asia Asia Asia Asia Native Native Africa Asia Native CSA Native Africa Africa africa Africa africa Asia Africa Europa Europa Native Native Native Africa Native Native CSA Native Native CSA NA Asia Africa africa Native NA NA Native CSA CSA CSA CSA Native CSA CSA CSA NA NA NA
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O F+O O O M+O O+M O O O O O O O O O+M O O O O O O O O O O O
Cactaceae Cactaceae Cactaceae Cactaceae Cactaceae Campanulaceae Cannaceae Caryophyllaceae Cleomaceae Cleomaceae Commelinaceae Commelinaceae Commelinaceae Commelinaceae Commelinaceae Commelinaceae Commelinaceae Convolvulaceae Costaceae Costaceae Crassulaceae Crassulaceae Crassulaceae Crassulaceae Crassulaceae Crassulaceae Crassulaceae
Epiphyllum sp. Schlumbergera sp. Selenicereus anthonyanus (Alexander) D.R. Hunt
Hippobroma longiflora (L.) G. Don Canna indica L. Dianthus sp. Cleome pilosa Benth. Cleome spinosa Jacq. Callisia repens (Jacq.) L. Dichorisandra thyrsiflora J.C. Mikan Gibasis geniculata (Jacq.) Rohw. Tradescantia fluminensis Vell. Tradescantia pallida (Rose) D.R. Hunt Tradescantia spathacea Sw. Tradescantia zebrina Heynh. Ipomoea fistulosa Mart. ex Choisy Costusspp. Tapeinochilos ananassae K. Schum. Echeveria runyonii Rose ex Walther Echeverias sp. Graptopetalum sp. Kalanchoe blossfeldiana Poelln. Kalanchoe daigremontiana Raym.-Hamet & H.
Pitaya de ornato Bailarina Costilla pescadoo Cactus Reunion de señorita Hippobroma Bandera Clavelina Cachofla de monte/ Chilito Cachofla Chisme Semaforo Chisme caliente/Telefono Matali verde Matali violet Magey morado Metalio zebra Campana Cana de cristo Indonesia Crassu 5422 Boton/ Gallina echada Conchita
Perrier
Kalanchoe fedtschenkoi Raym.-Hamet & H.Perrier Kalanchoe gastonis-bonnieri Raym.-Hamet & H.
Caracol de mar
Perrier
Crassulaceae Crassulaceae Crassulaceae Crassulaceae Crassulaceae Crassulaceae Cupressaceae Davalliaceae Davalliaceae Davalliaceae Ericaceae Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae
Kalanchoe pinnata (Lam.) Pers. Sedum mexicanum Britto Sedum morganianum E. Walther Sedum sp. Sedum sp. Sedum sp. Cupressus lusitanica Mill. Nephrolepis duffii T. Moore Nephrolepis falcata (Cav.) C. Chr. Nephrolepis exaltata (L.) Schott Rhododendron simsii Planch. Acalypha hispida Burm. f. Acalypha hispida Burm. f. Acalypha reptans Sw. Acalypha wilkesiana Müll. Arg. Codiaeum variegatum (L.) Rumph. ex A. Juss. Euphorbia cotinifolia L. Euphorbia leucocephala Lotsy
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbia pulcherrima Willd. ex Klotzsch
Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbia tithymaloides L. Euphorbia trigona Haw. Jatropha gossypiifolia L.
Euphorbiaceae
Jatropha multifida L.
Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Fabaceae
Jatropha podagrica Hook. Ricinus communis L. Arachis pintoi Krapov. & W.C. Greg.
Fabaceae
Bauhinia manandra Kurz
Fabaceae Fabaceae
Delonix regia (Bojer ex Hook.) Raf. Senna alata (L.) Roxb.
Hoja del aire Colchon de niño Cola de borrego Imgp 5537 Dedido de niño Tresa china Cipres Helecho cola de sirena Helecho touffu Azalea Flor de gusano Gusano grande Gusano pequeno rouge Gusana verde/blanco Croto Huele de noche/ Cabeza de viejo Pascua/ Noche buena/ Espera navidad
Mano de leon Ceibillita/Papayita /Palito de ceiba
Pata de vaca/Casco de venado/ Jacaramba Flamboyant Barajo
CSA CSA Native NA NA West Indies CSA Europa Native Native Native Native Native Native Native Native Native Native Native Asia Native Native Native Africa
O O O O O O O O O+M O O O O O O O+M O+M O O+M O O O O O
Africa
O
Africa
O
Africa
O
Africa Native Native NA NA NA Native NA NA NA Asia Asia Asia Oceania Oceania Asia Native Native
O+M O O+M O O O O O O O O O O O O CV+O O O
Native
O
Native Africa Native
O O O+M
Native
O
Native Africa CSA
O O Abon+O
Asia
O
Africa Native
O O+M
Geraniaceae Gesneriaceae Gesneriaceae Gesneriaceae Gesneriáceas Heliconiaceae Heliconiaceae Heliconiaceae Heliconiaceae Hydrangeaceae Iridaceae Iridaceae Lamiaceae Lamiaceae
Geranium sp. Chrysothemis pulchella (Donn) Decne. Episcia cupreata Hanst. Saintpaulia ionantha H. Wendl. Streptocarpus caulescens Vatke Heliconia collinsiana Griggs Heliconia psittacorum L.f. Heliconia rostrata Ruiz & Pav. Heliconia spp. Hydrangea macrophylla (Thunb.) Ser. Gladiolus x hortulanus Bailey Neomarica longifolia (Link & Otto) Sprague Holmskioldia sanguinea Retz. Ocimum sp.
Berijoa Heliconia Heliconia Platanillo Hortensia Gladiola Lirio Sombrerito Albahaca
Lamiaceae
Plectranthus scutellarioides (L.) R. Br.
Manto
Lamiaceae Lamiaceae Lamiaceae Lythraceae Lythraceae Malvaceae Malvaceae Malvaceae Malvaceae Malvaceae Malvaceae Marantaceae Marantaceae Marantaceae Marantaceae Marantaceae Marantaceae Marantaceae Marantaceae Marantaceae Maranthaceae Maranthaceae Maranthaceae Melastomataceae Melastomataceae Melastomataceae Meliaceae Moraceae Moraceae Musaceae Musaceae Myrtaceae Nyctaginaceae Nyctaginaceae Oleaceae Onagraceae Orchidaceae Orchidaceae Orchidaceae Orchidaceae Orchidaceae
Plectranthus verticillatus (L. f.) Druce Salvia coccinea Buc'hoz ex Etl. Salvia splendens Salsa purple Cuphea hyssopifolia Kunth Lagerstroemia indica L. Abutilon sp. Chiranthodendron pentadactylon Larreat. Dombeya wallichii (Lindl.) Baill. Hibiscus rosa-sinensis L. Malvaviscus arboreus var. mexicanus Schltdl. Pachira aquatica Aubl. Calathea lancifolia Boom Calathea louisae Gagnep. Calathea makoyana E. Morren Calathea ornata (Lindl.) Körn. Calathea picturata K. Koch & Linden Calathea sp. Ctenanthe amabilis (E. Morren) H. Kenn. & Nicolson Ctenanthe pilosa Eichler Ctenanthe setosa Eichler Maranta leuconeura E. Morren Stromanthe sanguinea Sond.
Chisme/ Planta del dinero
Orchidaceae
Conostegia xalapensis (Bonpl.) D. Don ex DC. Heterocentron elegans (Schltdl.) Kuntze Tibouchina urvilleana (DC.) Cogn. Melia azedarach L. Ficus benjamina L. Ficus repens Hook. ex Miq. Musa coccinea Andrews Musa ornata Roxb. Callistemon sp. Bougainvillea glabra Choisy Mirabilis jalapa L. Jasminum nitidum Skan Fuchsia spp. Brassavola nodosa (L.) Lindl. Brassia verrucosa Lindl. Encyclia cordigera (Kunth) Dressler Epidendrum ramosum Jacq. Epidendrum stamfordianum Bateman Guarianthe aurantiaca (Bateman ex Lindl.) Dressler
Orchidaceae
Guarianthe skinneri (Bateman) Dressler & W.E.
& W.E. Higgins Higgins
Geranium
O O O O O O O O O O O O O M+O
Bugambilia/ Bugambilia china Maravilla Jazmin Fucsia Barba de viejo Candelaria San José Orchidea Candelaria
Europa CSA CSA Africa Africa Native CSA CSA NA Asia Africa Native Asia Not Native Africa & Asia Africa Native CSA Native Asia CSA Native Africa Asia Native Native CSA CSA CSA CSA CSA CSA CSA CSA CSA CSA CSA NA Native Native CSA Asia Asia Asia Asia Asia Oceania CSA Native Asia CSA Native Native Native Native Native
Candelaria
Native
O
Candelaria
Native
O
ALA de cucaracha/ Arana Violeta
Julieta Mosquito Estromella Colodrino/ Clavel nano Mano de leon Arbol navidad irma Clavel/Tulipan Clavel cimarron Zapatón Hoja de espalda
Hoja de biblia Hoja ardilla Imgp 5387 Hoja
Hoja de elefante Cinco negrito
Paraiso Laurel Platano rojo
O O O O O O O O F+O O O O+M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O+M O+M O O O O O O O
Orchidaceae Orchidaceae Orchidaceae Orchidaceae Orchidaceae Orchidaceae Orchidaceae Orchidaceae Oxalidaceae Phyllanthaceae Pinaceae Piperaceae Piperaceae Piperaceae Plantaginaceae Plantaginaceae
Oncidium laeve (Lindl.) Beer Oncidium sphacelatum Lindley Phalaenopsis sp Prosthechea chacaoensis (Rchb. f.) W.E. Higgins Sobralia macrantha Lindl. Stanhopea sp. Vanilla planifolia Andrews Oxalis regnellii Miq. Breynia disticha J.R. Forst. & G. Forst. Pinus sp. Peperomia argyreia (Miq.) E. Morren Peperomia 'Jayde' Peperomia rotundifolia (L.) Kunth Angelonia angustifolia Benth. Antirrhinum majus L.
Orchidea Chorizo con huevo Orchidea
Native Native Asia
O O O
Candelaria
Native
O
Candelaria
Native CSA Native Native CSA Oceania Native CSA NA CSA Native Europa
O O O O O O O+L O O O O O
Africa
O
NA Native NA Asia CSA
O O O O O
Native
O
Native Asia Not native Asia Asia Africa Not native
O O O O+LF+M O O O
Africa
O
Native Africa Africa Africa Asia Asia Native NA CSA Native CSA CSA CSA Africa + Asia CSA CSA CSA Africa Native NA NA Native Native Asia Asia
O O O O O+M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Vanilla Oreja de buro Trebol Nevando en Paris Pino Hoja sandia Corazon Chisme mini
Dragon Plumbago/ Cola de novia/ Azale Plumbaginaceae Plumbago auriculata Lam. de novia Poaceae Pasto Polygonaceae Antigonon leptopus Hook. & Arn. Confeti Polypodiaceae Platycerium sp. Hoja de cuero Pontederiaceae Eichhornia sp. Lirio acuatico Portulacaceae Portulaca grandiflora Hook. Mananita Mananita feuilla large/ amor de Portulacaceae Portulaca umbraticola Kunth un rato Primulaceae Jacquinia macrocarpa Cav. Laurel del mar Primulaceae Primula obconica Hance Primula Rosaceae Rosa spp. Rosas Rubiaceae Ixora coccinea L. Argentina Rubiaceae Ixora finlaysoniana Wall. ex G. Don Reunion blanca Rubiaceae Mussaenda erythrophylla Schumach. & Thonn. Mussaenda Rubiaceae Mussaenda sp. Mussaenda Reunión de señorita/ Dulce de Rubiaceae Pentas lanceolata (Forssk.) Deflers coco Ruscaceae Beaucarnea pliabilis (Baker) Pata elefante Ruscaceae Dracaena fragans (L.) Ker Gawl. Ruscaceae Dracaena godseffiana Sander ex Mast. Ruscaceae Dracaena sanderiana Sander Rutaceae Murraya paniculata (L.) Jack Muralla Scrophulariaceae Buddleja davidii Franch. Cola de borrego Scrophulariaceae Russelia equisetiformis Schltdl. & Cham. Selaginellaceae Selaginella sp. Helecho Solanaceae Brunfelsia nitida Benth. Huele de noche Solanaceae Datura inoxia Mill. Toloache Solanaceae Datura sp. Solanaceae Lycianthes rantonnei (Carrière) Bitter Solanaceae Petunia sp. Petunia Solanaceae Solanum ovigerum Dunal Huevo Solanaceae Solanum pseudocapsicum L. Solanaceae Solanum quitoense Lam. Solanaceae Streptosolen jamesonii (Benth.) Miers Strelitziaceae Strelitzia reginae Aiton Aves del paraiso Turneraceae Turnera ulmifolia L. Urticacea Pellionia sp. Urticacea Pilea depressa (Sw.) Blume Urticacea Pilea microphylla (L.) Liebm. Urticacea Pilea nummulariifolia (Sw.) Wedd. Chisme Verbenaceae Clerodendrum chinense (Osbeck) Mabb. Verbenaceae Clerodendrum speciosissimum C. Morren Arete de la India
Verbenaceae Verbenaceae Verbenaceae Verbenaceae Verbenaceae Vitaceae
Zingiberaceae Zingiberaceae
Clerodendrum thomsoniae Balf. Duranta erecta L. Lantana camara L. Petrea volubilis L. Stachytarpheta frantzii Pol. Parthenocissus quinquefolia (L.) Planch. Aloe sp. Aloe vera (L.) Burm. f. Alpinia purpurata (Vieill.) K.Schum. Alpinia vittata W. Bull
Zingiberaceae
Alpinia zerumbet (Pers.) B.L. Burtt & R.M. Sm. Alpinia blanc
Zingiberaceae Zingiberaceae
Curcuma spp. Etlingera elatior (Jack) R.M. Sm. Hedychium gardnerianum Shepard ex KerGawl Zingiber spectabile Griff.
Xanthorrhoeaceae Xanthorrhoeaceae
Zingiberaceae Zingiberaceae
Arete de la India Delphina Venturosa Bejuco Verbena Hiedra Sábila estrella del mar Sábila Hawaiana Hawaina hoja pinta
O O O O O O O O+M O O
Curcuma Antorcha
Africa Native Native CSA Native Native Africa Africa Asia Oceania Asia & Oceania Asia Asia
Jasmin/ Mariposa
Asia
O
Maraca Imgp 5432 Arbol sauce Cica Cielo azul Colgante Colgante 2 Espuma de mar Imgp 4995 Gara del Aguila Helecho 5078 Helecho 5081 Helecho 5306 Helecho 5320 Helecho 5550 Helecho canasta Imgp 5401 Malacate Mosquito Puro de viejito Sábila japonesa, cuero de chivo
Asia NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O
Appendix 5 List of the species used as home remedy plants in the homegardens F = food; M = Medicinal; O = Ornamental; LF = Live fence Family Acanthaceae Adoxaceae Anacardiaceae Anacardiaceae Annonaceae Apiaceae Apiaceae Apocynaceae Araceae Asparagaceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Bignoniaceae Bignoniaceae Bixaceae Boraginaceae
Species Brugmansia x candida Pers. Sambucus mexicana C. Presl ex DC. Mangifera indica L. Spondias mombin L. Annona muricata L. Apium graveolens L. Foeniculum vulgare Mill. Thevetia ahouai A. DC. Xanthosoma robustum Schott Yucca guatemalensis Baker Ageratum conyzoides L. Artemisa ludoviciana Nutt. Ssp mexicana (Willd) Keck. Artemisia absinthium L. Tagetes erecta L. Tithonia diversifolia (Hemsl.) A. Gray Parmentiera edulis DC. Tecoma stans (L.) Juss. ex Kunth Bixa orellana L. Heliotropium indicum L.
Local name2 Campana Sauco Mango Jobo Guanábana Apio Hinojo Coyol de gato Capote Flor de winter, Izote Baroja de sucho Incienso Ajenjo Flor de muerto Girasol Guajilote Trenadora Achiote Hoja de alacrán
Use O+M M F+M F+M F+M M F+M O+F+M F+M F+M M M M M+O O+M F+M O+M F+M M
Burseraceae Cactaceae Caricaceae Chenopodiaceae Cleomaceae Combretaceae Commelinaceae Commelinaceae Costaceae Crassulaceae Crassulaceae Cucurbitaceae Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiaceae Fabaceae Fabaceae Lamiaceae Lamiaceae Lamiaceae Lamiaceae Lamiaceae Lauraceae Malvaceae Malvaceae Muntingiaceae Myrtaceae Nyctaginaceae Nyctaginaceae Oxalidaceae Phytolaccaceae
Bursera simaruba (L.) Sarg. Opuntia spp. Carica papaya L. Chenopodium ambrosioides L. Cleome pilosa Benth. Terminalia catappa L. Tradescantia spathacea Sw. Tradescantia zebrina Heynh. Costusspp. Kalanchoe pinnata (Lam.) Pers. Sedum morganianum E. Walther Sechium edule (Jacq.) Sw. Cnidoscolus aconitifolius ssp. aconitifolius Breckon Jatropha curcas L. Jatropha gossypiifolia L. Crotalaria longirostrata Hook. & Arn. Senna alata (L.) Roxb. Mentha x piperita L. Ocimum micranthum Ocimum sp. Plectranthus amboinicus (Lour.) Spreng. Plectranthus coleoides 'mintleaf' Persea americana Mill. Guazuma ulmifolia Lam. Pachira aquatica Aubl. Muntingia calabura L. Psidium guajava L. Bougainvillea glabra Choisy Mirabilis jalapa L. Averrhoa carambola L. Petiveria alliacea L.
Piperaceae
Peperomia pellucida (L.) Kunth
Piperaceae
Piper auritum Kunth
Piperaceae Poaceae Polypodiaceae Rosaceae
Piper spp. Cymbopogon citratus (DC.) Stapf Phlebodium aureum (L.) J. Smith Eriobotrya japonica (Thunb.) Lindl.
Rubiaceae
Hamelia patens Jacq.
Rubiaceae Rubiaceae Rutaceae Rutaceae Rutaceae Rutaceae Solanaceae Solanaceae
Ixora coccinea L. Morinda citrifolia L. Citrus aurantiifolia (Christm.) Swingle Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck Murraya paniculata (L.) Jack Ruta graveolens L. Solanum americanum Mill. Solanum rudepannum Dunal Lantana urticifolia Mill. (syn. Lantana camara fo. Verbenaceae urticifolia (Mill.) I.E.Méndez) Verbenaceae Lippia dulcis Trev. Verbenaceae Lippia sp. Verbenaceae Verbena carolina L. Verbenaceae Verbena litoralis Kunth Xanthorrhoeaceae Aloe vera (L.) Burm. f. Zingiberaceae Zingiber officinale Roscoe
Palo jiote Nopal Papaya Epazote Chilito Almendra Magey morado Metalio zebra Cana de cristo Hoja del aire Cola de borrego Chayote Chaya Piñon Mano de leon Chipilin Baraja/Barajo Hierba buena Albahaca cimaron Albahaca Orégano Vaporub Aguacate Cuaulote Zapatón Capulín Guayaba Bugambilia, Maravilla Carambola Zorillo Corrimiento/Hoja de cristalina Hoja santa/Hierba santa/Santa María Cordoncillo Té de limon Calaguala Nispero Hoja de cáncer/ cancerina Argentina Noni Limón Naranja dulce Muralla Ruda Hierba mora Lava plato
LF+M F+M F+M F+M O+M F+S+M O+M O+M O+M O+M O+M F+M F+M M+LF O+M F+M O+M F+M M M+O F+M M F+M L+M O+M F+M F+M O+M O+M F+M M
Venturosa cimarron
M
Orozuz Té llana Verbena Verbena Sábila Gengibre Riñonina Teramisina Tinta
M M M M O+M F+M M M M
M F+M M+LF F+M M F+M M O+LF+M F+M F+M F+M O+M M F+M M
Quique Rozenn Cocoa, coffee and sugarcane farmers: an ethnobotanical characterization of their homegardens in the Soconusco region (Chiapas, Mexico) Abstract The main objective of the present thesis was to characterize from the ethnobotanical approach, the agrobiodiversity of homegardens in the Soconusco region of Chiapas. The second objective was to study the influence of the surrounding main crop on the management and plant diversity of the homegardens. Data was collected on garden management, plant richness, and plant uses in 55 homegardens from three villages, each with one of the following commercial crops: cocoa, coffee or sugarcane. A total of 490 species were inventoried of which the richest plant family was the Araceae (24 species). Trees and shrubs (97 species) were found with densities generally inferior to 500 individuals per ha. The number of species per homegarden varied from 12 to 134 species, with 60 % of the homegardens having more than 50 species. In each village, homegardens and the commercial plots were connected by interchanges of species and leaf litter. The main plant uses were, in descending order for the three villages: ornamental, food and medicinal, with 292, 126 and 75 species, respectively. The prior subsistence role of the homegardens is thus being replaced by an aesthetic function. The influence of various socioeconomic and cultural factors on the role of homegarden is discussed. Keywords: agrobiodiversity, aesthetic, agroforestry systems, socioeconomic factors, rural transformations, Soconusco Résumé La présente étude avait pour objectif principal de caractériser rdins de la région du Soconusco au Chiapas, Mexique. Elle avait pour second objectif influence des parcelles agricoles environnantes sur la gestion et la diversité végétale des jardins. Pour cela, des données ont été recueillies sur les pratiques agricoles et la diversité végétale de 55 jardins situés dans trois villages cultures dominantes suivantes: cacao, café ou sucre de canne. Un total de 409 espèces a été inventorié, la famille des Araceae (24 espèces) en ayant le plus grand nombre. Les densités arbustes (97 espèces) étaient généralement inférieures à 500 individus par ha. Le s par jardins variait entre 12 et 134 espèces, 60 % des jardins en ayant plus de 50. Dans chaque village, jardins et parcelles agricoles était connectés par des échanges e. Les plantes étaient utilisées pour trois usages principaux, lesquels étaient en ordre décroissant dans chaque village: ornemental, alimentaire et médicinal, avec respectivement 292, 126 et 75 espèces. Le rôle originel de subsistance des jardins est donc en é par une fonction esthétique. de plusieurs facteurs socioéconomiques et culturels sur le rôle des jardins est discutée. Mots-clés: Agrobiodiversité, esthétique, systèmes agroforestiers, facteurs socioéconomiques, transformations rurales, Soconusco
