MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2220951037 · doi:10.17348/era.14.0.367-379

Ethnobotanical Survey of Woody Plants in Shorobe and Xobe Villages, Northwest Region of Botswana

2015· article· en· W2220951037 on OpenAlexfundno aff
John Neelo, Keotshephile Kashe, Demel Teketay, Wellington Masamba

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnobotany Research and Applications · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAfrican Botany and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsWoody plantEthnobotanyGeographyBark (sound)AgroforestryIndigenousFodderForestryBiologyEcologyMedicinal plants

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ethnobotanical investigations were conducted at Xobe and Shorobe Villages in northwestern Botswana to identify woody plants used by the local people. A total of 90 households (35 in Xobe and 55 in Shorobe) were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire and personal interviews. A total of 38 woody species representing 16 families and 25 genera were recorded. Of these, 28 species representing 15 families and 22 genera were recorded from Shorobe, and 27 species representing 10 families and 15 genera were recorded from Xobe. The uses of woody plants were grouped into eight categories, namely construction, fuelwood, furniture, medicine, human food, fodder, farm implements, and shade. Several of the species are used for more than one purpose. At both study sites, the use category with the highest proportion of number of woody species and proportion among the use categories was human food. Thirteen of the families were represented by 23 woody species that are used for medicinal purposes, and the most commonly used plant parts were the roots, bark, leaves, and stems. Nine of the 28 woody species (28%) in Shorobe and nine of the 27 woody species (33.3%) in Xobe provide edible parts. Six (21%) and eight (30%) woody species recorded in Shorobe and Xobe, respectively, are used for construction purposes. Most plants are used as fuelwood for household energy generation. In spite of the scarcity of natural forests in the study areas, the local communities continue to depend on the indigenous woody species in their surroundings for their survival. Virtually all trees identified in the different families are useful in one way or another in the lives of the rural communities, with most of the species serving more than one function. There is, therefore, a need for cultivation, protection, and sustainable management of these valuable resources for sustaining rural livelihoods in the study sites.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.201
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.152 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthnobotany Research and ApplicationsSame topicAfrican Botany and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207