Research Communications

OPEN  ACCESS

Traditional Ethnozoological Practices of Galliformes by Indigenous Inhabitants in Koraput District of Odisha, India

Bhawani Sabat¹, Ankeet Kanwar¹, Basavaraj S. Holeyachi², Riddhika Kalle^1,3, Kamal Kant Joshi⁴, and Ashutosh Singh^1*

¹Sálim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History, South India Centre of Wildlife Institute of India, Anaikatty (Post), Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, 641108, India. ²Padmaja Naidu Himalayan Zoological Park, Jawahar Parbat, Darjeeling, West Bengal, 734101, India. ³Centre for Functional Biodiversity, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa. ⁴Department of Environmental Science, Graphic Era Hill University, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, 248002, India.

^*apgsacon@gmail.com

Received July 16, 2024 | Accepted April 29, 2025 | Published July 16, 2025

Ethnobiology Letters 2025 16(1):40-55 | DOI 10.14237/ebl.16.1.2025.1894

Abstract Hunting has been a traditional human practice for centuries to exploit faunal resources for beneficial needs. Wild Galliformes are particularly hunted for bushmeat, ornaments, religious rituals, spiritual practices, and medicine. This study documents the traditional ethnozoological knowledge and practices of Galliformes utilized by the Indigenous inhabitants of Koraput district, Odisha, India. Information was collected using the Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) method through semi-structured interviews. We recorded eight Galliformes species utilized in 23 distinct ways. Six body parts (meat, skull, egg, feather, feet bone, and body oil) were used to treat 15 human ailments. Results indicated that oral application (52.1%) was the most effective mode of treatment, followed by topical application (47.8%). Among the reported species, feathers of Gallus gallus and Gallus gallus domesticus were most commonly used for treating ear-related complaints (Fidelity Level [FL] = 100%), while feathers of Pavo cristatus were least utilized, associated with predicting the birth of male children (FL = 6.7%). This study provides the first documentation of the ethnomedicinal use of three quail species (Coturnix coturnix, Perdicula erythrorhyncha, and Perdicula asiatica) in Odisha. This study also highlights three hunting techniques along with the cultural importance of the Galliformes and is the first quantitative ethnozoological analysis of Galliformes in the Koraput district, using FL percentage scores. Findings of this study emphasize the significance of Galliformes, linked with traditional ethnomedicine, hunting, and socio-cultural systems.

Keywords Ethnoornithology, Traditional medicine, Wildlife conservation, Hunting practices, Fidelity level, Feathers

Supplementary Files available at https://doi.org/10.14237/ebl.16.1.2025.1894

Introduction

Ethnozoology is defined as the study of human-animal interactions, which provides valuable insights into traditional knowledge systems and cultural contexts. Among tribal communities, this knowledge forms the backbone of healing practices and customs because wherein fauna and their by-products are used to treat various diseases (Alves et al. 2018; Costa-Neto 1999). Animal-derived products have long been valued for their medicinal properties in treating various human ailments (Alves and Rosa 2005, 2007; Alves et al. 2018; Lev 2003; Cragg and Newman 2013; Yinegar et al. 2007). The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that 80% of the global population relies on flora- and fauna-based medicines for immediate healthcare needs (WHO 1993). Ayurveda—an ancient system of medicine deeply rooted in Indian culture—utilizes a wide range of plant- and animal-based ingredients to treat ailments. It has served as a cornerstone of traditional healthcare practices since ancient times, particularly in remote areas where modern medical facilities are lacking (Patwardhan 2005). Even today, approximately 15–20% of ayurvedic medicines are derived from animal sources (Chaudhury et al. 2016; Kim and Song 2013). Therefore, animals have consistently been utilized in traditional medicine across various cultures (Haq et al. 2020; Loko et al. 2019; Singh et al. 2020; Souza et al. 2022).

India is home to a diverse array of tribal communities, each with its unique ethnomedicinal practices. These traditions vary across regions and reflect distinct cultural beliefs, as observed in Himachal Pradesh (Singh et al. 2020), Assam (Borah and Prasad 2017), Rajasthan (Kushwah et al. 2017; Mahawar and Jaroli 2006), Tamil Nadu (Chellappandian et al. 2014; Vijayakumar et al. 2015b), Ladakh (Haq et al. 2020), Kerala (Vijayakumar et al. 2015a), and West Bengal (Chaudhury et al. 2016). Odisha similarly stands out for its rich diversity of tribal communities, accounting for 9.7% of India’s total tribal population, with 62 tribal communities comprising 22.1% of the state’s overall population (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Research and Training Institute 2018). Within this demography, ethnozoological practices form an integral part of cultural life and have been well documented in several regions of Odisha (Jena et al. 2020; Joseph 1988; Mishra and Panda 2011; Mishra et al. 2011; Pradhan 2016), highlighting the importance of animal resources in both traditional medicine and daily practices.

Hunting is one of the oldest human activities and remains an integral component of ethnozoological practices, reflecting the relationship between human societies and wildlife (Alves 2012). Faunal-derived products serve a range of purposes beyond medicine, including use as food, clothing, and in magico-religious practices (Alves et al. 2018). In India, hunting was an ancient practice and a vital survival tool for sustenance in various communities, and it continues today with complex ecological, social, and economic implications (Gubbi and Linkie 2012; Velho et al. 2012). While mammal hunting has been more extensively documented, the use of avifaunal resources for human needs is equally rooted in Indian culture (Aiyadurai 2011, 2012). The illegal hunting of scheduled wild birds through various hunting techniques remains a major concern, irrespective of their conservation status at present (IUCN 2024; Neto et al. 2022)

Galliformes, commonly known as gamebirds, have long been part of human lifestyles as domesticated pets. However, they are now greatly threatened due to excessive hunting pressures driven by the demand for their high-protein bushmeat, ornamental value, plumage, and use in ethnomedicines and religious practices (Aiyadurai 2011, 2012; Fuller and Garson 2000; Kaul et al. 2004; Singh et al. 2022; Tian et al. 2018). Hunting customs such as “small game hunting,” targeting wild fowls in Western Odisha, have been documented by Padhan (2023), yet there remains a substantial knowledge gap regarding the utilization of Galliformes by tribal communities in Southern Odisha. A previous avian diversity study in the Koraput district by Majumdar (1988) made no mention of Galliformes or associated ethnozoological practices. Therefore, the present study aims to document the ethnozoological uses and hunting practices involving Galliformes among tribal inhabitants in the Koraput district through detailed quantitative analysis.

Methods

Study Area

The present study was conducted in the Koraput district of Odisha, located along the western fringe of the Eastern Ghats in the southern part of the state (18º 13’ to 19º 10’ N and 82º 5’ to 83º 23’ E), covering approximately 8,807 km². Geographically, the study area is covered with hilly terrain (highest peak, 1,672 m asl), dense forests, waterfalls, and narrow intermontane valleys. Koraput shares its borders with two neighboring states of India: Chhattisgarh to the west and Andhra Pradesh to the south (Figure 1).

Figure 1 Sites and localities surveyed for the questionnaire in the Koraput District of Odisha.

The district is administratively divided into 14 blocks, comprising 226 Gram Panchayats and 2,042 villages. It has a total population of 1,379,647, and a population density of 157 people per square kilometer (Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner India 2011). Approximately 50% of this population belongs to tribal communities such as the Paraja, Gadaba, Kandha, Saura, and others (Behera and Mohanty 2019; Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Research and Training Institute 2018). These tribal groups, commonly referred to as Adivasis, depend mostly on natural resources for their livelihoods. India is home to 45 Galliformes species, of which 13 species—comprising five quails, two spurfowls, three francolins, and two pheasants—are present in Odisha and are currently categorized as Least Concern (LC) (Sathyakumar and Sivakumar 2007).

Data Collection

Field surveys were conducted across 15 regions of the Koraput district, Odisha—Boipariguda, Doraguda, Tanginiguda, Kollar, Dasamantpur, Keraput, Kakalpoda, Majhiguda, Bhatipara, Ranginiguda, Kota Junction, Chandili, Jeypore, Rondapali, and Kotpad (Figure 1). Semi-structured interviews, based on the Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) method (Kim and Song 2013; Kumera et al. 2022), were conducted from March to May 2023, totaling 200 hours of data collection on ethnozoological practices of Galliformes. Both investigators and respondents were actively involved in discussions during the interview. We targeted participants from various age groups (Table 1). Prior to the interviews, we introduced ourselves to the locals, explained the study objectives, and requested permission while emphasizing our commitment to respecting and protecting their Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). The questionnaire was designed following Chellappandian et al. (2014), Huntington (2000), Kumera et al. (2022), Vijayakumar (2015a), and focused on documenting the Galliformes species involved in ethnozoological practices, their vernacular names, hunting methods, body part utilization, medicinal purposes, modes of application, and any associated commercial applications.

Table 1 Demographic profiles of respondents interviewed for the survey (n = 45).

Demographics		Number of Respondents	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	33	73.33
	Female	12	26.67
Age Group	Between 18-30	5	11.11
	Between 31-40	6	13.33
	Between 41-50	20	44.44
	Between 51-60	9	20
	Above 60	5	11.11

Quantitative Analyses

The respondents’ answers were summarized and analyzed using Fidelity Level (FL). FL was calculated to identify the frequently used Galliformes species for treating certain ailments, as reported by the inhabitants in the study area. The FL percentage was calculated using the following formula:

FL (%) = Np/N× 100

Here, Np denotes the number of informants who mentioned the use of specific animal species for certain ailments, and N denotes the total number of informants who used a particular species for treating any ailment (Chellappandian et al. 2014; Kim and Song 2013; Kumera et al. 2022; Loko et al. 2019; Vijayakumar et al. 2015a). The higher values of FL percentage indicate greater agreement among respondents regarding the utilization of an animal species for treating ailments, while lower values reflect less agreement of respondents for using a particular animal species for treating any ailments.

Results

Demographic Characteristics of Respondents

Individuals (n=45) aged above 18 years (33 males and 12 females) participated in the interviews (Table 1). The majority of respondents (44.44%) were aged 41–50 years. Participants aged above 60 and 18–30 years were the least represented, each accounting for only 11.11%. Most respondents had poor literacy levels and belonged to the low-income groups. Male respondents accounted for 73.33%, whereas females comprised only 26.67%. In terms of daily activities, females were primarily engaged in household chores and agricultural activities, while males were predominantly involved in farming, cattle grazing, and coaching traditional practices and customs to the younger generation.

Galliformes Diversity and Habitat in the Study Area

The respondents identified eight Galliformes species (Table 2) that are commonly observed and locally recognized. Most of these species are known by their vernacular names; in the local Desia and Odia languages, fowls are commonly referred to as Kukda. Additionally, male fowls are called Ganja, whereas females are called Peti.

Table 2 Ethnomedicinal uses of Galliformes by the local inhabitants of Koraput District, Odisha.

SL No.	Scientific Name	English Name	Local Name/ Vernacular Name	Parts/Products Used	Ailments Treated	Additives Used	Preparation	Mode of Application	FL %
1	Pavo cristatus	Indian Peafowl	majura, mayura, jalia majura (male), maku majura (female), mai majura (female)	Meat	-	None	Eating after cooking	Oral	NA
				Skull- Head part	Evil attack	None	Praying	Topical	13.3
				Egg	-	None	Eating after cooking	Oral	NA
				Feather	Fever, Cough, Cold, Vomiting, Diarrhea, and Constipation in young ones	Mustard Oil	Feather-roasted, powdered, and dissolved in mustard oil to make tiny balls	Oral	20
					Exorcism	None	A bunch of eye tail feathers is stroked over the body	Topical	93.3
					Evil eye	None	Tying	Topical	91.1
					Pregnant women have an increased probability of having a boy child	Banana	Eye tail feather in between the cut banana	Oral	6.7
					Ear complaints	Water	Feather burnt, crushed, and dissolved in water	Topical	46.7
					Fever, Cough, Vomiting, Cold, and Febrile convulsions in young ones	None	The eye tail feather is tied with a string and worn on the neck	Topical	86.7
				Feet Bone	Ear infections like ear pus	Sandalwood rubbing stone or any grinding stone	Dried legs are ground on a grinding stone with water in a circular motion and put into the ear as drops	Topical	11.1
2	Gallus gallus	Red Junglefowl	desi kukda, bana kukda, bana ganja (male), ganja kukda (male), mai kukda (female), peti kukda (female), bana penti (female)	Meat	Fever, Cough, Joint pain, Bone fractures	None	Eating after cooking	Oral	88.9
				Feather	Ear wax cleaning	Coconut Oil/Mustard Oil	Dipped in oil, & used as an ear bud to clean the earwax	Topical	100
				Leg	Cough, Cold	Vegetables	Soup	Oral	57.8
				Egg	-	None	Eating after cooking	Oral	NA
3	Gallus gallus domesticus	Domestic chicken	kukda, ganja Kukda (male), peti kukda (female)	Meat	Fever, Cough, Joint pain, Bone fractures	None	Eating after cooking	Oral	88.9
				Feather	Ear wax cleaning	Coconut Oil/Mustard Oil	Dipped in oil, & used as an ear bud to clean the earwax	Topical	100
				Leg	Cough, cold	Vegetables	Soup	Oral	66.7
				Egg white	Bone fracture	None	Massaging	Topical	84.4
4	Galloperdix lunulata	Painted Spurfowl	pandka, mai titri (female), khoimo kukda	Body Oil	Skin burns	None	Massaging	Topical	75.6
5	Galloperdix spadicea	Red Spurfowl	khoimo kukda, khoimi kukda, patrali kukda, choto ban kukda	Body oil	Body wounds, Skin burns, Body swelling	None	Massaging	Topical	75.6
6	Perdicula erythrorhyncha	Painted Bush Quail	ban gundri, bodo ban gundri, gagor gundri, bodo gundri	Meat	Kidney stones	None	Eating after cooking	Oral	86.7
7	Perdicula asiatica	Jungle Bush Quail	sano gundri, kani gundri, duma gundri, choto gundri, manda gundri	Meat	Kidney stones	None	Eating after cooking	Oral	86.7
8	Coturnix coturnix	Common Quail	jommi gundri	Meat	Kidney stones	None	Eating after cooking	Oral	86.7

The study area, surrounded by dense forests, bamboo thickets, and terraced croplands, provides a diverse and suitable habitat for Galliformes. These birds primarily occupy areas that provide mix of forest cover and open spaces, ensuring both shelter and foraging grounds. Quails and spurfowls are particularly abundant in agricultural fields, like rice paddies, but particularly in finger millet farms, locally called Mandia. Unlike the more solitary pheasants, these species are in small groups, taking advantage of the resources provided by the agricultural landscape. This close association with agricultural areas highlights the role of human-altered landscapes in supporting certain Galliformes species.

Ethnomedicinal use of Galliformes

In the Koraput district, certain tribal communities rely on fauna-based medicine to treat a range of human ailments, relying mostly on Galliformes species (Table 2; Supplementary Table 1). Oral administration (52.1%) is slightly more prevalent than topical application (47.8%) among the documented practices. Six body parts of Galliformes—meat, skull, eggs, feathers, feet bones, and body oil—are commonly used in the preparation of medicinal remedies. G. gallus domesticus is favored over wild species due to its easy accessibility, particularly for treating ailments such as bone fractures, joint pain, musculoskeletal disorders, and analgesics. The meat ofC. coturnix, P. erythrorhyncha, and P. asiaticais commonly used for treating kidney stones. Feathers of P. cristatus, G. gallus, and G. gallus domesticus are mostly used for ear complaints. Additionally, the feathers of P. cristatus are utilized to treat ailments such as constipation, diarrhea, fever, cough, and cold in children, as well as for exorcisms and spiritual practices.

Patterns of Fidelity Level

We found that the most quoted species, with all 45 respondents citing the use of G. gallus and G. gallus domesticus feathers for ear wax cleaning, achieved the highest FL value of 100% (n = 45). This was followed by the feathers of P. cristatus used for exorcism (n = 42, FL = 93.3%) and warding off the evil eye (n = 41, FL = 91.1%). The meat of G. gallus and G. gallus domesticus was used for treating fever, cough and joint pain (n = 40 each, FL= 88.9%), followed by P. cristatus feathers, which were used to manage febrile convulsions in children (n  = 39, FL = 86.7%), and the egg white of G. gallus domesticus, which were used for healing bone fractures (n = 38, FL =  84.4%). The quail species, including C. coturnix, P. erythrorhyncha, and P. asiatica, all showed identical FL values of 86.7%, reflecting their effectiveness in treating kidney stones. Similarly, the Galloperdix spadicea Gmelin, JF, 1789 and Galloperdix lunulate Valenciennes, 1825 both exhibited identical FL values of 75.6%, with their body oil used to treat skin burns. Conversely, certain uses showed lower FL values. For instance, the skull of P. cristatus had a low value (n = 6, FL = 13.3%) for treating evil attacks, followed by the feet bones of P. cristatus used for ear infections (n = 5, FL = 11.1 %). The lowest FL value of 6.7% (n = 3) was observed for the oral consumption of P. cristatus feathers, believed to increase the likelihood of bearing a male child when used by pregnant women (Table 2).

Hunting Techniques

The reliance on wild meat in the Koraput district is closely tied to traditional hunting practices, which have been passed down through generations. According to the interviews, locals used a variety of weapons for hunting, including spears, bows and arrows, catapults, nets, bamboo traps, and ropes. The three main hunting techniques of Galliformes were net capturing, catapults, and bamboo basket traps (Figure 2). In the net capturing (Figure 2a), a long rope is attached to a triangle-shaped net with sharp iron nails along its edges. To capture wild Galliformes species, finger millet grains are scattered irregularly on the ground, and hunters hide nearby, holding the rope. When a fowl approaches and begins feeding, the trap is released, capturing the fowl. This technique is commonly used to capture G. gallus. In some cases, to capture a male wild G. gallus, a domesticated female fowl is tied near the trap. The male bird, drawn by the call of the female, is subsequently trapped by the hunters.

Figure 2 Different methods commonly used by locals to trap Galliformes in the Koraput district A Net capturing, B Catapult, and C Bamboo basket trap. Illustration by ©Bhawani Sabat.

Catapulting, locally known as Gulcha, is one of the most widely practiced methods for hunting Galliformes (Figure 2b). This small, Y-shaped weapon is made of wood and rubber latex strips that acts as a sling for holding and launching stones. When a fowl is spotted or its call is heard, the hunter stretches the elastic strips to the desired tension and releases the stone, often striking the fowl from a considerable distance, resulting in its instant death.

Bamboo baskets (Figure 2c) are commonly used to trap quails and spurfowls, particularly for bushmeat. Flocks, locally referred to as Manda, frequently visit croplands, making them easy targets for hunters. In this method, finger millet grains are scattered, and bamboo baskets are propped slantwise using a short stick tied to a thin rope. When the fowls begin feeding, the rope is pulled, causing the basket to fall and trap the small fowls inside. These trapped fowls are then sold in local markets, with prices ranging from Rs. 70 to 400 per bird, depending on their size.

In the past, these trapping methods were widely employed to hunt Galliformes, which were abundant in the region. However, with the advent of modernization, changes in cultural practices, a lack of interest among young ones, and the implementation of stricter wildlife regulations, the frequency of hunting has significantly declined, leading to a reliance on domesticated fowls for meat, and thus reflecting a gradual move towards sustainable practices.

Galliformes in Sporting Cultures

Galliformes have historically held a significant place in rural sporting traditions (Fuller and Garson 2000). Among local communities, a traditional sport known as Kukda gaali (cockfighting) remains a part of the local sporting culture. Although cockfighting is prohibited under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, respondents indicated that it continues to be clandestinely practiced in certain areas of Koraput. This sport typically involves both wild G. gallus and domesticated G. gallus domesticus, which are pitted against each other in cockpit rings. The fights are often brutal, with sharp-edged spurs tied to the legs of the competing birds, forcing them to battle until one succumbs. These events are usually accompanied by gambling and serve as a major attraction during festivals or local gatherings, symbolizing rural entertainment.

Galliformes in Socio-cultural Practices

The tribal communities in Koraput celebrate an annual hunting festival known as Chaitra Parab or Choith Porv, which spans several days to a month. During this festival, it is customary for at least one male member from each family to participate with others. Experienced hunters venture into dense forests and return with game animals, which are subsequently offered to the local deities as a form of ritualistic thanksgiving and celebration. These offerings are made to invoke blessings and good fortune. Saura paintings, created by the Saura tribe, are made using natural pigments derived from white rice paste, charcoal, red earth, and plant extracts. Executed on the mud walls of homes, the artworks depict stylized human figures, animals, trees, sun, moon, and deities in intricate geometric patterns. During Chaitra Parab, the paintings often portray scenes of communal hunting, agricultural abundance, ritual offerings, and the harmonious relationship between humans and nature. During the survey, 88.9% of respondents were aware of the Indian Wildlife Protection Act (IWPA-1972) and the associated legal consequences of hunting or poaching of protected species. At present, many communities have transitioned from sacrificing wild animals to using domesticated fowls during the festival.

Galliformes’ feathers are extensively used to create decorative items such as colorful fans for local rituals and festivals across the Koraput region. For instance, the modified tail contour feathers of P. cristatus are prominently featured in Koraput’s traditional performances known as Dhemsa dance, where performers clad in vibrant costumes carry ornamental brooms adorned with the long iridescent eye feathers of peafowl. Additionally, both men and women embellish their turbans with colorful fowl feathers as a symbol of tribal identity and culture (Figure 3a). Participants reported that the majority of people participating in ritual activities purchase feathers from local markets rather than sourcing them through hunting (Figure 3b). Regarding the origin of these feathers, 60% of respondents believed the feathers were manually plucked, while the rest assumed they were naturally shed. Interestingly, the majority (64.44%) expressed indifference regarding the method of feather collection, prioritizing accessibility over origin.

Figure 3 Galliformes feathers in folklore and festivities A Use of colored Galliformes feathers on head crowns during folk dances at festivals B sale of P. cristatus feathers in local markets. Photo by ©Bhawani Sabat.

Discussion

This study documented the ethnozoological practices and cultural significance of Galliformes in the Koraput district of Odisha. Firstly, we found that the knowledge and utilization of Galliformes were more prevalent among men, reflecting traditional gender-based roles in ethnozoological practices. Secondly, a key finding was the use of Galliformes body parts—both orally and topically—for treating various human ailments. These ethnozoological practices were supported by Fidelity Level (FL) analysis, which highlighted commonly shared knowledge of ethnomedicines within the study area. Thirdly, we recorded the different types of hunting tools and techniques traditionally used to capture different Galliformes species. Lastly, we outlined the cultural and traditional importance of these birds, emphasizing their symbolic and ritual roles in people’s lives.

This study faced several limitations. First, the sample size was relatively small and gender-biased, with fewer female respondents due to cultural restrictions, possibly limiting the full spectrum of medicinal and cultural knowledge known to women. Second, the study was geographically confined to a few locations in southern Odisha, which may not fully represent the diversity of ethnozoological practices across other Indigenous groups. However, our detailed, site-specific data offers valuable insights into regional practices that can serve as a foundation for broader comparative studies in the future. Third, we could not directly observe all hunting and cultural practices described due to their seasonal or private nature, however, we addressed this limitation using photo-elicitation and in-depth interviews to capture detailed narratives.

Despite these limitations, this study presents several strengths. To our knowledge, this is the first detailed documentation linking species-specific use of Galliformes in ethnomedicines and socio-cultural practices within a single narrative from the Koraput district of Odisha. We also documented the first ever meat usage of quail species (C. coturnix, P. asiatica, and P. erythrorhyncha) for treating kidney stones, which has not been previously reported, and emerged as a new finding highlighting a potentially undocumented aspect of local medicinal knowledge. The integration of field-based interviews with photographic documentation adds robustness to the findings. Furthermore, by emphasizing the inhabitants’ sustainable interactions with local biodiversity, i.e. transitions from hunting to domestication—this study contributes a positive narrative to conservation discourse.

Oral consumption emerged as the most effective mode of treatment in the studied sites, which aligns with the findings of Vijayakumar et al. (2015a). Similarly, other studies documented the use of P. cristatus—including legs for ear ache and feathers for infertility and convulsions—corresponds with previous reports by Mishra et al. (2011), Vijayakumar et al. (2015a), and Chellapandian et al. (2014). Additionally, Chellapandian et al. (2014) also described the combined use of P. cristatus feathers with Lepus nigricollis to alleviate rheumatic pain and hemiplegia, highlighting their diverse medicinal role. Similarly, the use of G. gallus and G. gallus domesticus—feathers for removing earwax, meat and legs for joint pain, fever, cough, and cold, and eggs for bone fractures—has also been reported by Kumera et al. (2022), Altaf et al. (2018), Vijayakumar et al. (2015a), and Chellapandian et al. (2014). Beyond orthopedic treatments, G. gallus domesticus eggs have also been reported for treating cardiovascular diseases, convulsions, bronchitis, skin disorders, arthritis, and diarrhea (Chellapandian et al. 2014; Kim and Song 2013; Nayak et al. 2022; Vijayakumar et al. 2015a). In terms of burn treatment, Chhetri et al. (2020) reported that G. gallus fat is orally consumed for treating skin burns, whereas this study found that the body oil of G. lunulata and G. spadicea is predominantly used for similar purposes, indicating regional variations in species preference. While previous literature (Atlaf et al. 2018; Vijayakumar et al. 2015a, 2015b) has noted the medicinal use of C. coturnix for muscle pain, weakness, sexual health, and anemia, our study is the first to document the use of meat from C. coturnix for treating kidney stones, thus moving beyond earlier findings and contributing additional data to the ethnomedicinal knowledge of Indian Galliformes.

The findings of the study also align with existing literature on the cultural significance of Galliformes in India, particularly in relation to their integration into regional art, dance, and sporting traditions. The magico-religious use of P. cristatus feathers for exorcism and protection against evil spirits and prayer chanting has been previously documented among several tribal communities in the Mayurbhanj district of Odisha (Behera and Mohanty 2019) and Darjeeling (Chhetri et al. 2020). The species used for creating ceremonial feather fans vary by region—communities in Northeast India, for example, utilize feathers from Lophophorus impejanus, Tragopan blythii, Polyplectron bicalcaratum, and Lophophorus sclateri, indicating a widespread and culturally shared tradition (Aiyadurai 2011). While Bhat (2010) elaborates on the symbolic role of birds in “Indian Art Forms,” our study adds by linking Galliformes to local paintings and traditional dance performances. A similar cultural expression involving birds has been reported among the Bhil tribe in Rajasthan (Kushwah et al. 2017). In sporting traditions, the use of G. gallus and G. gallus domesticus in local recreation aligns with observations by Haq et al. (2020), who reported similar practices involving Alectoris chukar and Tetraogallus species in the Trans-Himalayas, again showcasing species preference according to various regions. These cultural continuities underline the multifaceted importance of Galliformes beyond medicinal use.

Importantly, the interactions of tribal communities in the study area with Galliformes provide a brief understanding of their existing Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) about the birds’ feeding habits and habitat requirements. Similar TEK has been noted in other ethno-ornithological studies (Pam et al. 2020; Tidemann and Gosler 2010). The interviewed farmers in the study area recognize quails and spurfowls as non-threatening, allowing them to forage on fallen millet grains, fostering a symbiotic relationship that benefits both agriculture and avifauna, fostering coexistence. This research contributes to the growing body of ethnozoological literature, emphasizing the role of TEK in future conservation efforts. Future research should expand to other regions for comparative analysis and further explore the transmission of ethnozoological knowledge across generations.

Conclusion

This study is the first to document the use of Galliformes in traditional medicine and culture in the Koraput district of Odisha, providing deep insights into the traditional ethnozoological knowledge of Indigenous inhabitants. These tribals are often referred to locally as “Adivasis,” have an in-depth understanding of their local biodiversity, accumulated through generations of observation and oral knowledge transfer. The older generations serve as key knowledge holders in zootherapy, thus acting as living repositories of traditional animal-based medicine. Preserving such traditional ecological knowledge is important for their cultural identity and also for its potential to support modern conservation strategies. Despite increasing modernization through education, healthcare, and increased wildlife conservation awareness led by forest departments, has resulted in a gradual decline in reliance on Galliformes for food and medicine. This shift has reduced hunting pressures and fading traditional practices. However, traditional conservation practices include self-imposed rules such as seasonal taboos, selective hunting, and community norms against overharvesting, support certain species’ persistence. Understanding the sustainability of such practices requires assessing factors like hunting pressure, habitat changes, economic pressures, and bird population trends. A key limitation of this study is the lack of quantitative ecological data, such as Galliformes population estimates or hunting pressure metrics, which would have helped assess the sustainability of traditional practices more robustly. In contrast, modern conservation approaches involve protected areas and legal protection. This study highlights the need to find common ground between these systems to ensure effective, community-led conservation of Galliformes species and support sustainability. Although the species documented in this study are categorized as Least Concern, they still matter. Awareness should be raised about the importance of Galliformes and the repercussions of species extinction among the local inhabitants. Future research should combine ecological monitoring with community engagement and expand ethnozoological studies across southern Odisha to safeguard both biodiversity and traditional knowledge systems.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the participation of local tribals of the Koraput district belonging to 15 villages for sharing their traditional ethnozoological knowledge about Galliformes. We also thank Mr. Pradeeshwar R J for helping with map preparation.

Declarations

Permissions: All interviewed individuals provided oral consent to participate in the study. They were informed about the primary objectives and importance of the research and were asked for prior permission to collect information. Participants were also made aware that their responses would be used for publication and scientific purposes, to which they agreed.

Sources of funding: This work was supported by the Startup Research Grant (SRG) of Science and Engineering Research Board [Grant No. SRG/2022/000906] Department of Science and Technology, Government of India.

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

References Cited

Aiyadurai, A. 2011. Wildlife Hunting and Conservation in Northeast India: A Need for an Interdisciplinary Understanding. International Journal of Galliformes Conservation 2:61–73.

Aiyadurai, A. 2012. Bird Hunting in Mishmi Hills of Arunachal Pradesh, North-eastern India. Indian BIRDS 7:134–137.

Alves, R. 2012. Relationship Between Fauna and People and the Role of Ethnozoology in Animal Conservation. Ethnobiology and Conservation 1:1-69. DOI:10.15451/ec2012-8-1.2-1-69.

Alves, R. R. N., J. S. Silva, L. D. S. Chaves, and U. P. Albuquerque. 2018. Ethnozoology: An Overview and Current Perspectives. In Ethnozoology: Animals in Our Lives, edited by R. R. N. Alves and U. P. Albuquerque, pp. 513–521. Academic Press, Cambridge, MA.

Alves, R. R. N., and I. L. Rosa. 2005. Why Study the Use of Animal Products in Traditional Medicines? Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 1:5–9. DOI:10.1186/1746-4269-1-5.

Alves, R. R. N., and I. M. L. Rosa. 2007. Biodiversity, Traditional Medicine and Public Health: Where Do They Meet? Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 3:14. DOI:10.1186/1746-4269-3-14.

Atlaf, M., M. Umair, A. R. Abbasi, N. Muhammad, and A. M. Abbasi. 2018. Ethnomedicinal Applications of Animal Species by the Local Communities of Punjab, Pakistan. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 14:55. DOI:10.1186/s13002-018-0253-4.

Behera, S., and P. K. Mohanty. 2019. Ethnozoological Therapeutic Practice of Tribals of Mayurbhanj District, Odisha, India. International Journal of Zoology and Applied Biosciences 4:245–257. DOI:10.5281/zenodo.3580164.

Bhat, P. M. 2010. Birds and Nature in the Stepwells of Gujarat, Western India. In Ethno-ornithology: Birds, Indigenous Peoples, Culture and Society, edited by S. Tidemann and A. Gosler, pp. 141–151. Earthscan, London, Washington, DC.

Borah, M. P., and S. B. Prasad. 2017. Ethnozoological Study of Animals Based Medicine Used by Traditional Healers and Indigenous Inhabitants in the Adjoining Areas of Gibbon Wildlife Sanctuary, Assam, India. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 13:39. DOI:10.1186/s13002-017-0167-6.

Chaudhury, S., C. H. Rahaman, and H. Singh. 2016. Some Ethnozoological Uses of Birhor Tribe of West Bengal, India. Journal of Traditional and Folk Practices 2:33-42.

Chellappandian, M., P. Pandikumar, S. Mutheeswaran, M. G. Paulraj, S. Prabakaran, V. Duraipandiyan, S. Ignacimuthu, and N. A. Al-Dhabi. 2014. Documentation and Quantitative Analysis of Local Ethnozoological Knowledge Among Traditional Healers of Theni District, Tamil Nadu, India. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 154:116–130. DOI:10.1016/j.jep.2014.03.028.

Costa-Neto, E. M. 1999. Healing with Animals in Feira de Santana City, Bahia, Brazil. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 65:225–230. DOI:10.1016/s0378-8741(98)00158-5.

Cragg, G. M., and D. J. Newman. 2013. Natural Products: A Continuing Source of Novel Drug Leads. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) – General Subjects 1830:3670–3695. DOI:10.1016/j.bbagen.2013.02.008.

Fuller, R. A., and P. J. Garson, eds. 2000. Pheasants: Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan 2000‒2004. WPA/BirdLife/SSC Pheasant Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland. Switzerland and Cambridge, UK and the World Pheasant Association, Reading, UK.

Gubbi, S., and M. Linkie. 2012. Wildlife Hunting Patterns, Techniques, and Profile of Hunters in and Around Periyar Tiger Reserve. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 109:165–172.

Haq, S. M., E. S. Calixto, U. Yaqoob, R. Ahmed, A. H. Mahmoud, R. W. Bussmann, O. B. Mohammed, K. Ahmad, and A. M. Abbasi. 2020. Traditional Usage of Wild Fauna among the Local Inhabitants of Ladakh, Trans-Himalayan Region. Animals 10:2317. DOI:10.3390/ani10122317.

Huntington, H. P. 2000. Using Traditional Ecological Knowledge in Science: Methods and Applications. Ecological Applications 10:1270–1274. DOI:10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[1270:UTEKIS]2.0.CO;2.

IUCN. 2024. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Available at: https://www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed on December 12, 2024.

Jena, S., S. S. Das, and H. K. Sahu. 2020. Traditional Value of Red Weaver Ant (Oecophylla smaragdina) as Food and Medicine in Mayurbhanj District of Odisha, India. International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET) 8:936–946. DOI:10.22214/ijraset.2020.5148.

Joseph, A. N. T. 1988. Ethnozoology in the Tribal Welfare of Madhya Pradesh and Orissa. Records of the Zoological Survey of India 85:319–348. DOI:10.26515/rzsi/v85/i2/1988/161059.

Kaul, R., Hilaluddin, J. S. Jandrotia, and P. J. K. McGowan. 2004. Hunting of Large Mammals and Pheasants in the Indian Western Himalaya. Oryx 38:426–431. DOI:10.1017/S0030605304000808.

Kim, H., and M. J. Song. 2013. Ethnozoological Study of Medicinal Animals on Jeju Island, Korea. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 146:75–82. DOI:10.1016/j.jep.2012.11.011.

Kumera, G., G. Tamire, G. Degefe, H. Ibrahim, and D. Yazezew. 2022. Ethnozoological Study of Traditional Medicinal Animal Parts and Products Used among Indigenous People of Assosa District, Benishangul-Gumuz, Western Ethiopia. International Journal of Ecology 2022:1–9. DOI:10.1155/2022/8430489.

Kushwah, V. S., R. Sisodia, and C. Bhatnagar. 2017. Magico-religious and Social Belief of Tribals of District Udaipur, Rajasthan. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 13:69. DOI:10.1186/s13002-017-0195-2.

Lev, E. 2003. Traditional Healing with Animals (zootherapy): Medieval to Present-day Levantine Practice. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 85:107–118. DOI:10.1016/S0378-8741(02)00377-X.

Loko, L. E. Y., S. M. Fagla, A. Orobiyi, B. Glinma, J. Toffa, O. Koukoui, L. Djogbenou, and F. Gbaguidi. 2019. Traditional Knowledge of Invertebrates Used for Medicine and Magical-Religious Purposes by Traditional Healers and Indigenous Populations in the Plateau Department, Republic of Benin. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 15:66. DOI:10.1186/s13002-019-0344-x.

Mahawar, M. M., and D. P. Jaroli. 2006. Animals and their Products Utilized as Medicines by the Inhabitants Surrounding the Ranthambhore National Park, India. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2:46. DOI:10.1186/1746-4269-2-46.

Majumdar, N. 1988. Collection of Birds from Koraput District, Orissa, India. Records of Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta.

Mishra, N., and T. Panda. 2011. Zootherapeutical Uses of Animal Diversity in Coastal District of Orissa, India. British Journal of Pharmacology and Toxicology 2:154–158.

Mishra, N., S. D. Rout, and T. Panda. 2011. Ethno-zoological Studies and Medicinal Values of Similipal Biosphere Reserve, Orissa, India. African Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology 5:6–11. DOI:10.5897/AJPP09.241.

Neto, A. I. S., R. E. Fraga, and A. Schiavetti. 2022. Tradition and Trade: Culture and Exploitation of Avian Fauna by a Rural Community Surrounding Protected Areas in the South of Bahia’s State, Northeastern Brazil. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 18:12. DOI:10.1186/s13002-022-00515-x.

Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner India, Census of India. 2011. Odisha - Series 22 - Part XII B - District Census Handbook, Koraput [web page]. Available at: https://censusindia.gov.in/nada/index.php/catalog/953#metadata-copyrights. Accessed on December 12, 2024.

Padhan, T. 2023. Ethnoarchaeology of Hunting and Gathering Traditions in Western Odisha. In Animals in Archaeology: Integrating Landscapes, Environment and Humans in South Asia, edited by P. Goyal, G. S. Abhayan, and S. Channarayapatna, pp. 197–210. Department of Archaeology, University of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala.

Pam, G., D. Zeitlyn, and A. Gosler. 2020. Ethno-Ornithology of the Mushere People of Plateau State, Nigeria: A Comparison of the Traditional Bird Knowledge and Perceptions of Adult Urban/Rural Dwellers. Unilag Journal of Medicine, Science and Technology (UJMST) (CEBCEM Special Edition) 8:135–159.

Patwardhan, B. 2005. Ethnopharmacology and Drug Discovery. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 100:50–52. DOI:10.1016/j.jep.2005.06.006.

Pradhan, B. C. 2016. An Ethnozoological Study in the Areas of Satkosia Wildlife Sanctuary, Angul, Odisha, India. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Applied Sciences 6:108–122.

Sathyakumar, S., and K. Sivakumar, eds. 2007. Galliformes of India. ENVIS Bulletin: Wildlife and Protected Areas, vol. 10. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, India.

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Research and Training Institute. 2018. The Tribes of Odisha [web page]. Available at: https://www.scstrti.in/index.php/communities/tribes. Accessed on December 12, 2024.

Singh, A., and M. Israruddin. 2022. Trade of Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus Feathers on E-commerce Websites in India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 119. DOI:10.17087/jbnhs/2022/v119/166969.

Singh, A., G Jabin, B. D. Joshi, M. Thakur, L. K. Sharma, and K. Chandra. 2020. DNA Barcodes and Ethnomedicinal use of Sharpnose Guitarfish Glaucostegus granulatus by the Locals at Keylong, Lahaul and Spiti, Himachal Pradesh. Mitochondrial DNA Part B 5:113–114. DOI:10.1080/23802359.2019.1698329.

Souza, J. M., E. M. F. L. Neto, and F. S. Ferreira. 2022. Influence of the Sociodemographic Profile of Hunters on the Knowledge and Use of Faunistic Resources. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 18:38. DOI:10.1186/s13002-022-00538-4.

Tian, S., J. Xu, J. Li, Z. Zhang, and Y. Wang. 2018. Recent Advances of Galliformes Since 1990 and Future Prospects. Avian Research 9:32. DOI:10.1186/s40657-018-0124-7.

Tidemann, S., and A. Gosler. 2010. Ethno-ornithology: Birds, Indigenous Peoples, Culture and Society. Earthscan, London, Washington, DC.

Velho, N., K. K. Karanth, and W. F. Laurance. 2012. Hunting: A Serious and Understudied Threat in India, a Globally Significant Conservation Region. Biological Conservation 148:210–215. DOI:10.1016/j.biocon.2012.01.022.

Vijayakumar, S., J. E. M. Yabesh, S. Prabhu, M. Ayyanar, and R. Damodaran. 2015a. Ethnozoological Study of Animals Used by Traditional Healers in Silent Valley of Kerala, India. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 162:296–305. DOI:10.1016/j.jep.2014.12.055.

Vijayakumar, S., S. Prabhu, J. E. M. Yabesh, and R. Pragashraj. 2015. A Quantitative Ethnozoological Study of Traditionally Used Animals in Pachamalai Hills of Tamil Nadu, India. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 171:51–63. DOI:10.1016/j.jep.2015.05.023.

WHO/IUCN/WWF. 1993. Guidelines on Conservation of Medicinal Plants, Switzerland. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/2831701368. Accessed on December 12, 2024.

Yineger, H., E. Kelbessa, T. Bekele, and E. Lulekal. 2007. Ethnoveterinary Medicinal Plants at Bale Mountains National Park, Ethiopia. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 112:55–70. DOI:10.1016/j.jep.2007.02.001.