Perception and knowledge of grasshoppers among indigenous communities in tropical forest areas of southern Cameroon: Ecosystem conservation, food security, and health

IF 1 Q3 ENTOMOLOGY Journal of Orthoptera Research Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.3897/jor.30.64266
C. O. Ngoute, D. Hunter, M. Lecoq
{"title":"Perception and knowledge of grasshoppers among indigenous communities in tropical forest areas of southern Cameroon: Ecosystem conservation, food security, and health","authors":"C. O. Ngoute, D. Hunter, M. Lecoq","doi":"10.3897/jor.30.64266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The increased attention given to health, food security, and biodiversity conservation in recent years should bring together conventional scientists and indigenous people to share their knowledge systems for better results. This work aims to assess how grasshoppers are perceived by the local people in southern Cameroon, particularly in terms of food, health, and landscape conservation. Villagers were interviewed individually using a rapid rural assessment method in the form of a semi-structured survey. Nearly all people (99%) declared that they are able to identify local grasshoppers, generally through the color of the insect (80%). Crop fields were the most often cited landscape (16%) in terms of abundance of grasshoppers, with forest being less mentioned (8%). In general, villagers claimed that grasshopper abundance increased with forest degradation. Grasshoppers were found during all seasons of the year but noted to be more abundant during the long dry seasons. People found grasshoppers both useful and harmful, the most harmful reported being Zonocerus variegatus, an important crop pest. Cassava is the most attacked crop with 75–100% losses. Industrial crops, such as cocoa, coffee, and bananas, were not cited as being damaged by grasshoppers. The most effective conventional method cited for the control of pest grasshoppers is the use of pesticides (53%) with, in most cases (27%), a 75–100% efficiency. The traditional method of spreading ash was also often cited (19%), with an estimated efficiency of 25–75%. Biological methods were neither cited nor used by the villagers. Most of them (87%) declared that they eat grasshoppers; some sold these insects in the market (58%) and some used them to treat diseases (11%).","PeriodicalId":53641,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthoptera Research","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthoptera Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3897/jor.30.64266","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENTOMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

The increased attention given to health, food security, and biodiversity conservation in recent years should bring together conventional scientists and indigenous people to share their knowledge systems for better results. This work aims to assess how grasshoppers are perceived by the local people in southern Cameroon, particularly in terms of food, health, and landscape conservation. Villagers were interviewed individually using a rapid rural assessment method in the form of a semi-structured survey. Nearly all people (99%) declared that they are able to identify local grasshoppers, generally through the color of the insect (80%). Crop fields were the most often cited landscape (16%) in terms of abundance of grasshoppers, with forest being less mentioned (8%). In general, villagers claimed that grasshopper abundance increased with forest degradation. Grasshoppers were found during all seasons of the year but noted to be more abundant during the long dry seasons. People found grasshoppers both useful and harmful, the most harmful reported being Zonocerus variegatus, an important crop pest. Cassava is the most attacked crop with 75–100% losses. Industrial crops, such as cocoa, coffee, and bananas, were not cited as being damaged by grasshoppers. The most effective conventional method cited for the control of pest grasshoppers is the use of pesticides (53%) with, in most cases (27%), a 75–100% efficiency. The traditional method of spreading ash was also often cited (19%), with an estimated efficiency of 25–75%. Biological methods were neither cited nor used by the villagers. Most of them (87%) declared that they eat grasshoppers; some sold these insects in the market (58%) and some used them to treat diseases (11%).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
喀麦隆南部热带森林地区土著社区对蚱蜢的认知和知识:生态系统保护、粮食安全和健康
近年来对卫生、粮食安全和生物多样性保护的日益关注应该使传统科学家和土著人民聚集在一起,分享他们的知识系统,以取得更好的成果。这项工作旨在评估喀麦隆南部当地人民对蚱蜢的看法,特别是在食物、健康和景观保护方面。采用半结构化调查形式的快速农村评估方法对村民进行了个别访谈。几乎所有人(99%)都声称他们能够识别当地的蚱蜢,通常是通过昆虫的颜色来识别的(80%)。就蚱蜢的丰度而言,农田是最常被提及的景观(16%),森林被提及的较少(8%)。总的来说,村民们声称蝗虫的数量随着森林的退化而增加。一年四季都有蚱蜢,但在漫长的旱季,蚱蜢的数量更为丰富。人们发现蚱蜢既有用又有害,据报道最有害的是一种重要的农作物害虫——斑带绦虫。木薯是受灾最严重的作物,损失75-100%。工业作物,如可可、咖啡和香蕉,并没有被蝗虫破坏。防治蝗虫最有效的传统方法是使用杀虫剂(53%),在大多数情况下(27%),效率为75-100%。传统的撒灰方法也经常被引用(19%),估计效率为25-75%。村民们既没有引用也没有使用生物方法。他们中的大多数(87%)声称他们吃蚱蜢;一些人在市场上出售这些昆虫(58%),一些人用它们来治疗疾病(11%)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Orthoptera Research
Journal of Orthoptera Research Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Insect Science
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
25.00%
发文量
20
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Environmental and hormonal control of body-color polyphenism in Patanga japonica (Orthoptera, Acrididae): Effects of substrate color, crowding, temperature and [His7]-corazonin injection A new long-winged pygmy grasshopper in Eocene Baltic amber raises questions about the evolution of reduced tegmenula in Tetrigidae (Orthoptera) Factors related to sound production by the Chinese grasshopper Acrida cinerea during escape Geographic variation in body size of the migratory locust Locusta migratoria (Orthoptera, Acrididae): Masaki’s cline and phase polyphenism Mantodea of Iran: A review-based study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1