↓ Skip to main content

A study on use of animals as traditional medicine by Sukuma Tribe of Busega District in North-western Tanzania

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#14 of 621)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 tweeters
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A study on use of animals as traditional medicine by Sukuma Tribe of Busega District in North-western Tanzania
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13002-015-0001-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rajeev Vats, Simion Thomas

Abstract

Faunal resources have played an extensive range of roles in human life from the initial days of recorded history. In addition to their importance, animals have been acknowledged in religion, art, music and literature and several other different cultural manifestations of mankind. Human beings are acquainted with use of animals for foodstuff, cloth, medicine, etc. since ancient times. Huge work has been carried out on ethnobotany and traditional medicine. Animal and their products are also holding medicinal properties that can be exploited for the benefit of human beings like plants. In Tanzania, many tribal communities are spread all over the country and these people are still totally depended on local customary medicinal system for their health care. In the world Tanzania is gifted with wide range of floral and faunal biodiversity. The use of traditional medicine from animals by Sukuma ethnic group of Busega district is the aim of the present study. In order to collect the information on ethnozoological use about animal and their products predominant among this tribe in Busega district, a study was carried out from August 2012, to July 2013. Data were collected through semi-structured questionnaire and open interview with 180 (118 male and 62 females) selected people. The people from whom the data were collected comprise old age community members, traditional health practicener, fishermen and cultural officers. The name of animal and other ethnozoological information were documented. Pictures and discussion were also recorded with the help of camera and voice recorder. A total of 42 various animal species were used in nearly 30 different medicinal purposes including STD, stoppage of bleeding, reproductive disorders, asthma, weakness, tuberculosis, cough, paralysis and wound and for other religious beliefs. It has been noticed that animal used by Sukuma tribe, comprise of seventeen mammals, seven birds, four reptiles, eight arthropods and two mollusks. Some of the protected species were also used as important medicinal resources. We also found that cough, tuberculosis, asthma and other respiratory diseases are the utmost cited disease, as such, a number of traditional medicines are available for the treatment. The present work indicates that 42 animal species were being used to treat nearly 30 different ailments and results show that ethnozoological practices are an important alternative medicinal practice by the Sukuma tribe living in Bungesa district. The present study also indicates the very rich ethnozoological knowledge of these people in relation to traditional medicine. So there is a critical need to properly document to keep a record of the ethnozoological information. We hope that the information generated in this study will be useful for further research in the field of ethnozoology, ethnopharmacology and conservation approach.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 1%
Unknown 69 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 20%
Student > Bachelor 11 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 16%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 9 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 27%
Environmental Science 9 13%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Psychology 4 6%
Other 16 23%
Unknown 11 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 May 2019.
All research outputs
#889,537
of 14,969,286 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#14
of 621 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,565
of 230,495 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,969,286 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 621 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 230,495 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them