幸存的龙:弗洛雷斯东北部科莫多巨蜥的人种志报告

IF 2.9 3区 社会学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY Journal of Ethnobiology Pub Date : 2022-12-01 DOI:10.2993/0278-0771-42.4.417
G. Forth
{"title":"幸存的龙:弗洛雷斯东北部科莫多巨蜥的人种志报告","authors":"G. Forth","doi":"10.2993/0278-0771-42.4.417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Besides their namesake island and several immediately neighboring small islands, Komodo monitors (Varanus komodoensis)—better known as Komodo dragons—also occur on the larger island of Flores to the east. Apart from the extreme western part of Flores, the giant lizards occur along the island's northern coast; but how far eastward they extend remains a question. Early in the twentieth century, reports by local people described dragons as present in the northeast, while in 1985, officials of the Indonesian department of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation reported catching specimens of V. komodoensis in the vicinity of Cape Kotabaru in northeastern Flores. Camera trapping conducted between 2014 and 2019 by field zoologists failed to produce evidence of dragons in this region. Yet, during recent ethnographic research, the present author recorded reports of local people encountering specimens in Kotabaru. In view of locally recognized differences between Komodo dragons and the related, though much smaller, water monitor (Varanus salvator), the present study discusses local knowledge of Komodo dragons among the Lio people of northeastern Flores as a prelude to reviewing local sighting reports, some from as recently as 2016 and 2017. With regard to mostly anthropogenic factors that would account for recent decline in dragon numbers throughout Flores Island, as well as features of the species that render it resilient to these, the paper concludes that a small number of dragons remain in the Kotabaru region, so that recent sighting reports are likely valid.","PeriodicalId":54838,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Ethnobiology","volume":"42 1","pages":"417 - 431"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surviving Dragons: Ethnographic Reports of Komodo Monitors (Varanus komodoensis) in Northeastern Flores\",\"authors\":\"G. Forth\",\"doi\":\"10.2993/0278-0771-42.4.417\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract. Besides their namesake island and several immediately neighboring small islands, Komodo monitors (Varanus komodoensis)—better known as Komodo dragons—also occur on the larger island of Flores to the east. Apart from the extreme western part of Flores, the giant lizards occur along the island's northern coast; but how far eastward they extend remains a question. Early in the twentieth century, reports by local people described dragons as present in the northeast, while in 1985, officials of the Indonesian department of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation reported catching specimens of V. komodoensis in the vicinity of Cape Kotabaru in northeastern Flores. Camera trapping conducted between 2014 and 2019 by field zoologists failed to produce evidence of dragons in this region. Yet, during recent ethnographic research, the present author recorded reports of local people encountering specimens in Kotabaru. In view of locally recognized differences between Komodo dragons and the related, though much smaller, water monitor (Varanus salvator), the present study discusses local knowledge of Komodo dragons among the Lio people of northeastern Flores as a prelude to reviewing local sighting reports, some from as recently as 2016 and 2017. With regard to mostly anthropogenic factors that would account for recent decline in dragon numbers throughout Flores Island, as well as features of the species that render it resilient to these, the paper concludes that a small number of dragons remain in the Kotabaru region, so that recent sighting reports are likely valid.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54838,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Ethnobiology\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"417 - 431\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Ethnobiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2993/0278-0771-42.4.417\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Ethnobiology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2993/0278-0771-42.4.417","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要除了与科莫多岛同名的岛屿和几个紧邻的小岛外,科莫多巨蜥——更广为人知的名字是科莫多龙——也出现在东面较大的弗洛雷斯岛上。除了弗洛雷斯岛的最西部地区外,这种巨型蜥蜴还分布在该岛的北部海岸;但它们向东延伸多远仍是个问题。在20世纪早期,当地人的报告称龙出现在东北部,而在1985年,印度尼西亚森林保护和自然保护部门的官员报告说,在弗洛雷斯东北部的科塔巴鲁角附近捕获了科莫多角龙的标本。野外动物学家在2014年至2019年期间进行的相机捕捉未能在该地区找到龙的证据。然而,在最近的民族志研究中,本作者记录了当地人在Kotabaru遇到标本的报告。鉴于当地认识到科莫多巨蜥与相关的小得多的水监视器(Varanus salvator)之间存在差异,本研究讨论了弗洛雷斯东北部廖奥人对科莫多巨蜥的当地知识,作为回顾当地目击报告的前体,其中一些报告最近来自2016年和2017年。考虑到最近整个弗洛雷斯岛的龙数量下降的主要人为因素,以及使其适应这些因素的物种特征,该论文得出结论,Kotabaru地区仍有少量龙,因此最近的目击报告可能是有效的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Surviving Dragons: Ethnographic Reports of Komodo Monitors (Varanus komodoensis) in Northeastern Flores
Abstract. Besides their namesake island and several immediately neighboring small islands, Komodo monitors (Varanus komodoensis)—better known as Komodo dragons—also occur on the larger island of Flores to the east. Apart from the extreme western part of Flores, the giant lizards occur along the island's northern coast; but how far eastward they extend remains a question. Early in the twentieth century, reports by local people described dragons as present in the northeast, while in 1985, officials of the Indonesian department of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation reported catching specimens of V. komodoensis in the vicinity of Cape Kotabaru in northeastern Flores. Camera trapping conducted between 2014 and 2019 by field zoologists failed to produce evidence of dragons in this region. Yet, during recent ethnographic research, the present author recorded reports of local people encountering specimens in Kotabaru. In view of locally recognized differences between Komodo dragons and the related, though much smaller, water monitor (Varanus salvator), the present study discusses local knowledge of Komodo dragons among the Lio people of northeastern Flores as a prelude to reviewing local sighting reports, some from as recently as 2016 and 2017. With regard to mostly anthropogenic factors that would account for recent decline in dragon numbers throughout Flores Island, as well as features of the species that render it resilient to these, the paper concludes that a small number of dragons remain in the Kotabaru region, so that recent sighting reports are likely valid.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Ethnobiology
Journal of Ethnobiology Social Sciences-Anthropology
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
3.40%
发文量
21
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: JoE’s readership is as wide and diverse as ethnobiology itself, with readers spanning from both the natural and social sciences. Not surprisingly, a glance at the papers published in the Journal reveals the depth and breadth of topics, extending from studies in archaeology and the origins of agriculture, to folk classification systems, to food composition, plants, birds, mammals, fungi and everything in between. Research areas published in JoE include but are not limited to neo- and paleo-ethnobiology, zooarchaeology, ethnobotany, ethnozoology, ethnopharmacology, ethnoecology, linguistic ethnobiology, human paleoecology, and many other related fields of study within anthropology and biology, such as taxonomy, conservation biology, ethnography, political ecology, and cognitive and cultural anthropology. JoE does not limit itself to a single perspective, approach or discipline, but seeks to represent the full spectrum and wide diversity of the field of ethnobiology, including cognitive, symbolic, linguistic, ecological, and economic aspects of human interactions with our living world. Articles that significantly advance ethnobiological theory and/or methodology are particularly welcome, as well as studies bridging across disciplines and knowledge systems. JoE does not publish uncontextualized data such as species lists; appropriate submissions must elaborate on the ethnobiological context of findings.
期刊最新文献
Vegetal Agency in Street Tree Stewardship Practices: People-Plant Involutions Within Urban Green Infrastructure in New York City Cotton Monocultures and Reorganizing Socioecological Life in Telangana, India Cycad Regulation and Community Creation: South African Stakeholder Perspectives on Conservation What Do We Know About Threshing Traditional Grains in Australia? Indigenous Traditional Knowledge on Wild Edible Mushrooms: Cultural Significance, Extraction Practices, and Factors Leading to Changes in Their Abundance in Central Mexico
×
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