↓ Skip to main content

Which Plants Used in Ethnomedicine Are Characterized? Phylogenetic Patterns in Traditional Use Related to Research Effort

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 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
Which Plants Used in Ethnomedicine Are Characterized? Phylogenetic Patterns in Traditional Use Related to Research Effort
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2018.00834
Pubmed ID
Authors

Estevão N. F. Souza, Elizabeth M. Williamson, Julie A. Hawkins

Abstract

Plants are important resources in healthcare and for producing pharmaceutical drugs. Pharmacological and phytochemical characterization contributes to both the safe use of herbal medicines and the identification of leads for drug development. However, there is no recent assessment of the proportion of plants used in ethnomedicine that are characterized in this way. Further, although it is increasingly apparent that plants used in ethnomedicine belong to preferred phylogenetic lineages, it is not known how this relates to the focusing of research effort. Here we identify species and lineages rich in ethnomedicinal use and develop methods to describe how well they are known pharmacologically and/or phytochemically. We find 50% of plant species of the family Leguminosae used in ethnomedicine in Brazil, a geographical area where plants are an important part of healthcare, have been the focus of either phytochemical screening or testing for biological activity. Plant species which have more use reports are studied significantly more often (p < 0.05). Considering the taxonomic distribution of use, 70% of genera that include species with ethnomedicinal use have been studied, compared to 19% of genera with no reported use. Using a novel phylogenetic framework, we show that lineages with significantly greater numbers of ethnomedicinal species are phylogenetically over-dispersed within the family, highlighting the diversity of species used. "Hotnode clades" contain 16% of species but 46% of ethnomedicinally-used species. The ethnomedicinal species in hotnode clades have more use reports per species (p < 0.05), suggesting they are more frequently used. They are also more likely to be characterized pharmacologically and/or phytochemically. Research focus has followed traditional use by these measures, at least for these Brazilian plants, yet ethnomedicinal species yielding candidate drugs, raising public health concerns and more intensively studied lie outside of the hotnode clades.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 94 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 14%
Student > Master 12 13%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 34 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 10%
Environmental Science 6 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 5%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 33 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 22 July 2021.
All research outputs
#4,450,087
of 25,010,497 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#2,261
of 23,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,676
of 334,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#60
of 477 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,010,497 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 23,979 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 334,195 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 477 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.