Ranking Tool Created for Medicinal Plants at Risk of Being Overharvested in the Wild
Abstract
We developed an adaptable, transparent tool that can be used to quantify and compare vulnerability to overharvest for wild collected medicinal plants. Subsequently, we are creating a list of the most threatened medicinal plants in temperate North America. The new tool scores species according to their life history, the effects of harvest, their abundance and range, habitat, and demand. The resulting rankings, based on explicit criteria rather than expert opinion, will make it easier to discuss areas of vulnerability and set conservation priorities. Here we present scores for 40 species assessed using the At-Risk Tool and discuss the traits that led to different scores for six example species: echinacea (Echinacea angustifolia DC. Asteraceae), peyote (Lophophora williamsii (Lem. ex Salm-Dyck) J.M. Coult. Cactaceae), sandalwood (Santalum spp. L. Santalaceae), stinging nettle (Urtica dioica L. Urticaceae), American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius L. Araliaceae) and mayapple (Podophyllum peltatum L. Berberidaceae).
References
Brownstein, C., M. Lee, and C. Safina. 2003. Harnessing Consumer Power for Ocean Conservation. Conservation Magazine 4(4).
Cech, R. A. 1998. Balancing Conservation with Utilization: Restoring Populations of Commercially Valuable Medicinal Herbs in Forests and Agroforests. Paper presented at the North American Conference on Enterprise Development through Agroforestry. Minneapolis, MN, October 4-7.
Chamberlain, J. L., S. Prisley, and M. McGuffin. 2013. Understanding the relationships between American ginseng harvest and hardwood forests inventory and timber harvest to improve co-management of the forests of eastern United States. Journal of Sustainable Forestry (in press).
Cunningham A. B. 2001. Applied Ethnobotany: People, Wild Plant Use, and Conservation. Earthscan Publications, London, UK.
Dentali, S. and M. Zimmermann. 2012. Tonnage Surveys of Select North American Wild-Harvested Plants, 2006-2010. American Herbal Products Association. Silver Springs, MD.
Gladstar, R. 2000. Introduction. Pp. 1-12 in Planting the Future, edited by R. Gladstar and P. Hirsch. Healing Arts Press, Rochester, VT.
Gladstar, R. and P. Hirsch. 2000. Planting the Future. Healing Arts Press, Rochester, VT.
Greenfield, J. and J. Davis. 2004. Medicinal Herb Production Guides. North Carolina Consortium on Natural Medicines and Public Health. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
Hankins, A. 1998. Producing and marketing wild simulated ginseng in forest and agroforestry systems. Paper presented at the North American Conference on Enterprise Development through Agroforestry. Minneapolis, MN, October 4-7.
Kindscher, K., D. M. Price, and L. Castle. 2008. Re-sprouting of Echinacea angustifolia Augments Sustainability of Wild Medicinal Plant Populations. Economic Botany 62(2):139-147.
Klein, R. 2000. Wise Old Plants. Pp. 24-38 in: Planting the Future, edited by R. Gladstar and P. Hirsch. Healing Arts Press, Rochester, VT.
McCoy, J. A., J. M. Davis, N. D. Camper, I. Khan, and A. Bharathi. 2007. Influence of Rhizome Propagule Size on Yields and Triterpene Glycoside Concentrations of Black Cohosh [Actaea racemosa (L.) Syn Cimicifuga racemosa (L.) nuttal]. HortScience 42(1): 61-64.
McGraw, J. B. 2001. Evidence for Decline in Stature of American Ginseng Plants from Herbarium Specimens. Biological Conservation 98:25-32.
McGraw, J. B. and M. A. Furedi. 2005. Deer Browsing and Population Viability of a Forest Understory Plant. Science 307(5711):920-922.
Mooney, E. H. and J. B. McGraw. 2009. Relationship Between Age, Size and Reproduction in Populations of American Ginseng, Panax quinquefolius (Araliaceae), Across a Range of Harvest Pressures. Ecoscience 16 (1): 84-94.
Peters, C. M. 1994. Sustainable Harvest of Non-timber Plant Resources in Tropical Moist Forest: An Ecological Primer. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY.
Price, D. H. and K. Kindscher. 2007. One Hundred Years of Echinacea angustifolia Harvest in the Smoky Hills of Kansas, USA. Economic Botany 61:86-95.
Rabinowitz, D. 1981. Seven forms of rarity. Pp 205-217 in: The biological aspects of rare plant conservation. Edited by J. Synge. Wiley, New York
Roberson, E. 2008. Medicinal Plants at Risk. A Native Plant Conservation Campaign Report. Center for Biological Diversity. Tucson, AZ.
Rock, J., G. Kauffman, and N. Murdock. 2012. Harvesting of Medicinal Plants in the Southern Appalachian Mountains. Journal of Medicinal Plant Conservation. Winter 2012: 12-13.
Schippmann U., D. Leaman, and A. B. Cunningham. 2006. A Comparison of Cultivation and Wild Collection of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants Under Sustainability Aspects. Pp. 75-95 in Medicinal and Aromatic Plants, edited by R.J, Bogers, L.E. Craker, and D. Lange. Wageningen UR Frontis Series, Vol. 17. Springer, Dordrecht, the Netherlands
Schippmann U., D. J. Leaman, and A. B. Cunningham. 2002. Impact of Cultivation and Gathering of Medicinal Plants on Biodiversity: Global Trends and Issues. In Biodiversity and the Ecosystem Approach in Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. Inter-Departmental Working Group on Biological Diversity for Food and Agriculture, FAO, Rome.
Terry, M., K. Trout, B. Williams, T. Herrera, and N. Fowler. 2011. Limitations to natural production of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae) I. Regrowth and survivorship two years post harvest in a South Texas population. Journal of the Botantical Research Institute of Texas 5:661−675.
Tummons, P. 2010. Dispute Over Hokukano Sandalwood Logging Ends Up Before Federal Bankruptcy Judge. Environment Hawaii. 21(4).
Westfall, R. E. and B. W. Glickman. 2004. Conservation of Indigenous Medicinal Plants in Canada. In Proceedings of the Species at Risk 2004 Pathways to Recovery Conference, edited by T. D. Hooper. Species at Risk 2004 Pathways to Recovery Organizing Committee, Victoria, B.C.
UpS. 2013. The United Plant Savers Homepage (http://www.unitedplantsavers.org/, accessed 9 Sept. 2013). East Barre, VT, USA.
USDA, NRCS. 2013. The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov, accessed 1 July 2013).National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC 27401-4901 USA.
Wixted, K. L. and J. B. McGraw. 2010. Competitive and Allelopathic Effects of Garlic Mustard (Alliaria petiolata) on American Ginseng (Panax quinquefolius). Plant Ecology 208:347-357.
Copyright (c) 2014 Ethnobiology Letters
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain ownership of the copyright for their content and grant Ethnobiology Letters (the “Journal”) and the Society of Ethnobiology right of first publication. Authors and the Journal agree that Ethnobiology Letters will publish the article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits others to use, distribute, and reproduce the work non-commercially, provided the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal are properly cited.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
For any reuse or redistribution of a work, users must make clear the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0).
In publishing with Ethnobiology Letters corresponding authors certify that they are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements. They warrant, on behalf of themselves and their co-authors, that the content is original, has not been formally published, is not under consideration, and does not infringe any existing copyright or any other third party rights. They further warrant that the material contains no matter that is scandalous, obscene, libelous, or otherwise contrary to the law.
Corresponding authors will be given an opportunity to read and correct edited proofs, but if they fail to return such corrections by the date set by the editors, production and publication may proceed without the authors’ approval of the edited proofs.
