Ethnobotanical study around Nainital Villages

A DISSERTATION

Submitted in Partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of the degree

Of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

IN

FORESTRY

Under the supervision

Of

Dr. Neeta Arya

Department of forestry and Environmental science

By

JAGJEEWAN SINGH DHAMI

DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE

D.S.B. CAMPUS KUMAUN UNIVERSITY

NAINITAL,UTTARAKHAND - 263001

1
 DECLARATION

I (Jagjeewan Singh Dhami) hereby declare that the dissertation work titled “Ethnobotanical
study around Nainital villages” is a partial fulfilment of M.Sc. Forestry degree course, is
original and carried out under the guidance of Dr. Neeta Arya , Department of forestry and
Environmental Science, D.S.B Campus Kumaun University, Nainital. The information
derived from literature has been duly acknowledged in the text and a list of references
provided. The dissertation has not been submitted in part or full for any other degree or
diploma of any other university.

Date: Jagjeewan Singh Dhami

Place: Nainital M.Sc. Forestry

Roll NO. - 2230120810006

Enrollment No. - KU19128445

2
The main objective of the current study:
●​ To document ethnobotanical and traditional folk knowledge.
●​ To analyse the Deterioration of ethnobotanical knowledge across age groups.
●​ To develop awareness for the conservation and importance of useful plants of this
region.

3
CHAPTER - 1 Introduction
Ethnobotany, the study of the intricate relationships between people and plants, has emerged
as a significant field that bridges natural and social sciences. The term "Ethnobotany" was
first coined by John W. Harshberger in 1895, defined as "the study of plants used by primitive
and aboriginal people" (Harshberger, 1895). Over time, the scope of ethnobotany has
expanded beyond mere documentation of plant uses to encompass the cultural, ecological,
and spiritual associations humans maintain with plant life. According to Balick & Cox, 1996
"ethnobotany explores not only how plants are used but also how they are perceived,
managed, and conserved by human societies" (Balick & Cox, 1996). Dr. Sudhanshu Kumar
Jain, (Founder of Ethnobotany in South East Asia) mentioned, "ethnobotany is the
total natural and traditional relationship between plants and indigenous people" (Jain,
1987).

In Uttarakhand, local communities extensively depend on traditional plant-based

knowledge to treat a variety of human diseases. Several researchers have documented
the region's rich ethnobotanical heritage. Jain (1991), Gaur (1999), Nautiyal et al.
(2001), Kala (2005), Phondani et al. (2010b), Semwal et al. (2010), Negi et al. (2010,
2011), Kandari et al. (2012), Bargali et al. (2015), Kapkoti et al. (2014), Negi et al.
(2014), Kumar et al. (2015), Pandey et al. (2016), Tiwari et al. (2020), and Ojha et al.
(2020), among others, have contributed significantly to documenting the
ethnobotanical wealth of the region.

In the IHR, about 18440 species of plants have been reported, of which 25.30% are endemic
to the Himalaya (Singh and Hajra, 1996; Samant et al., 1998b). This knowledge has been
passed down from generation to generation through experience, observation, and oral
traditions. In recent years, this field has become more important as people have started to
realize how fast we are losing not only plant species but also the valuable knowledge about
them. As forests are being cut down and modern lifestyles are spreading, the old ways of
using and respecting nature are slowly disappearing. Researchers like Martin (1995) and
Cotton (1996) have emphasized that traditional plant knowledge is a key to both biodiversity
conservation and cultural preservation. This kind of knowledge, built over centuries, also
supports areas like medicine, food security, and sustainable living. Ethnobotany, in this way,
is not just about studying plants but also about saving the wisdom of our elders and the
natural world they understood so well.

The Himalayan region, especially Uttarakhand, is a perfect example of how deeply nature
and culture are connected. It is known for its rich biodiversity and the many traditional
communities who have lived there in harmony with nature. In the Kumaon region of

4
Uttarakhand lies the Naina Devi Bird Sanctuary, famous not only for its birds but also for its
variety of plants and forest ecosystems. Surrounded by villages like Pangot, Saur, Haryal,
Mallabagad, and Ghughukham, this area is home to people who still use forest plants in their
everyday lives—for treating diseases, cooking, rituals, and other household needs. These
people depend on their surroundings for survival and have developed a deep understanding of
the plants that grow there.

Between October 2024 and March 2025, an ethnobotanical survey was conducted in these
five villages to collect and document the knowledge of plant used among local residents. The
aim of the study was to not only record the species being used but also to understand how
they are used, how the knowledge is passed down, and the cultural beliefs behind these
practices. The study focused on capturing information like which part of the plant is used,
how it is prepared, what it is used for, how often it is used, and from whom the knowledge
was learned. I used semi-structured interviews, group discussions, and informal conversations
to gather data. Most of the information came from elderly people, women, forest watchers,
and traditional healers, as they are the main holders of this kind of knowledge in these
villages. Researchers like Heinrich et al. (1998) have pointed out that involving community
elders and women is essential in ethnobotanical studies because they often hold more plant
knowledge than others.

During this study, I found that the older generation had indepth understanding of plant-based
medicine and daily uses, but the younger generation, especially College-going youth, in the
study area, had limited knowledge in this field. This matches with other studies from the
Indian Himalayas where researchers like Kala (2005) and Kunwar et al. (2013) have also
reported that younger people are losing interest in traditional practices due to modern
education, migration, and lifestyle changes. People working closely with forests, like
part-time farmers and forest watchers, had more understanding about seasonal herbs and rare
species. Women, especially those above 40, played a key role in sharing knowledge about
child health, nutrition, and first-aid treatments using local herbs. Their daily interaction with
household work, kitchen gardens, and natural surroundings has made them an important
source of practical ethnobotanical knowledge.

Several important plant species were frequently mentioned in the survey. Species like Isabgol
species were widely used to reduce acidity, Berberis species were known for natural
antibiotics. Bergenia ciliata was often used to treat kidney stones and urinary problems.
People used different methods to prepare these plants—some made teas or decoctions, some
dried and powdered them, while others used fresh leaves or roots in direct applications. These
methods are not random; they come from years of experience and careful observation. What
is more interesting is that many of these plants are also found in classical Ayurvedic texts.
However, the way local people use them often depends on availability, season, and specific
needs of the household or community. This flexible and situation-based use shows how
traditional knowledge adapts to the environment. According to Jain (1987), such knowledge
is local, practical, and often more sustainable than modern alternatives.

5
Another important observation was the cultural and ethnic diversity in the area. The villages
around Naina Devi Bird Sanctuary are not made up of a single ethnic group. Most people
living here have migrated from nearby districts or even from across the border. For example,
the Bisht and Arya families came from Almora, the Rautela’s from Bageshwar, the Joshis
from the Ranikhet area, and the Shahi’s from Nepal. The Tamta community also traces its
roots back to Almora. Because of their different origins, each group has brought its own
traditional knowledge and practices with them. This has created a rich mixture of
ethnobotanical knowledge in the area. People from Almora may be more familiar with certain
herbs, while those from Nepal might use a completely different plant for the same health
problem. This diversity adds depth to the study and shows how migration and culture
influence how plants are used.

The geography and ecology of the Naina Devi Bird Sanctuary also play a major role in
shaping plant availability and usage. The area ranges from about 1500 to 2200 meters in
elevation, which means it has a wide range of habitats—from dense oak forests and chir pine
slopes to grassy meadows and riverbanks. Each habitat supports different plant species,
which people have learned to use based on what grows around them. Some herbs are only
collected in specific months when they are most effective. This shows a strong seasonal
knowledge of the land and its resources. According to Singh and Singh (1992), the
Himalayan region is not only ecologically diverse but also highly sensitive to disturbance,
making traditional knowledge even more valuable for conservation.

At the same time, this knowledge is under threat. Before 2016, the area around Naina Devi
was not officially declared a bird conservation reserve; it was considered as a Nainital forest
area. During that period, many medicinal plants were harvested and sold, especially to
regions like Kotabagh & Ramnagar. Large companies often conducted extraction operations
through local villagers, who were unaware of the long-term ecological damage. This
unsustainable exploitation had lasting consequences—today, our forests are suffering. Many
valuable and rare plants that once thrived in this region are now hard to find, and the
ecological balance of the forest has been disturbed. That’s why this kind of study is
important—not just to write about plants but to support community-led conservation efforts.
If local people are involved in protecting their forests, they are more likely to do it in a way
that respects both nature and tradition.

This kind of ethnobotanical research can also help in rural development. By recording and
validating local knowledge, it can support small-scale industries, herbal product
development, and eco-tourism. It can even help set up community-based healthcare systems
using local herbs. The Naina Devi Bird Sanctuary is a perfect place for such ideas because it
has both natural beauty and cultural richness. Studies like this one can also guide
policymakers and forest managers to include traditional knowledge in conservation plans. As
Berkes (1999) pointed out, linking traditional knowledge with scientific methods can create
more effective and respectful ways to manage natural resources.

6
CHAPTER- 2 Review of Literature
The Nainital region of Uttarakhand, part of the Indian Central Himalayas, is renowned for its
diverse vegetation and rich ethnobotanical heritage. Indigenous communities have
historically relied on the wild flora for food, medicine, fuel, and cultural practices. Over time,
researchers have documented this traditional ecological knowledge to ensure its conservation
and sustainable use. Early botanical explorations in the broader Kumaon Himalaya, including
the Nainital region, were initiated by explorers such as Atkinson (1882), Kanjilal et al.
(1934-40), and Osmaston (1927). These works provided foundational floristic inventories,
although they focused primarily on taxonomy rather than ethnobotany. Later, detailed studies
like those of Gupta (1968) specifically addressed the flora of Nainital (Flora Nainitalensis),
offering critical insights into the region's plant wealth. Ethnobotanical studies in the Central
Himalayan belt gained momentum with works like Gaur (1983, 1999), who emphasized the
traditional uses of plants by local communities. Rawal (1984) and Pangtey et al. (1987, 1991)
also contributed significantly to the understanding of the ethnobotanical relationships
between plants and indigenous people in the Kumaon hills. Their field-based investigations
highlighted the vital role of wild edible plants (WEPs) and medicinal species in the
livelihoods of rural households.

Samant and Dhar (1997) conducted one of the most comprehensive inventories of wild
edibles in the Indian Himalayan Region (IHR), listing 675 species. This extensive
documentation included many species native to the Nainital district and surrounding areas,
thus offering a critical basis for further ethnobotanical inquiry. Similarly, Upreti et al. (2010)
recorded 184 wild edible species belonging to 112 genera and 56 families in Uttarakhand,
with significant representation from Nainital. Kala (2007) presented an important
ethnobotanical study wherein he recorded 23 cultivated food crops and 15 wild edible fruit
species preferred by local people in Uttarakhand, including Nainital. His work demonstrated
that despite modernization, many communities continued to use traditional wild plants for
nutritional and medicinal purposes. Mehta et al. (2006) focused specifically on the traditional
knowledge associated with wild edibles in the Kumaon Himalaya. They reported how rural
households in Nainital utilized various native plants to supplement their diets and incomes.
Their findings showed that knowledge about plant collection, preparation, and usage patterns
was deeply embedded in local traditions. Further contributions by Negi et al. (2015) enriched
the ethnobotanical database of the Nainital region by cataloging 116 edible species across 42
families. Their study documented vernacular names, habitat distributions, and usage modes,
offering a comprehensive resource for future conservation strategies.

Additionally, Devi and Thakur (2011) explored traditional uses of plants in the cold desert
areas of Himachal Pradesh, a neighboring Himalayan region. Their methodological
frameworks have been adopted for studying ethnobotanical knowledge in Nainital and
adjacent areas. Research by Tewari et al. (2010) in the Alaknanda valley of Uttarakhand also
paralleled the Nainital context, where 55 plant species were reported as vegetable
supplements and wild edibles, reaffirming the importance of WEPs in sustaining mountain
livelihoods. Documenting and conserving ethnobotanical knowledge has become increasingly

7
urgent, as emphasized by Termote et al. (2011) and Heywood (2011), given the rapid loss of
traditional ecological practices under the pressures of modernization, market integration, and
youth disinterest. Studies like those by Luczaj et al. (2013) further stressed that revitalizing
traditional plant knowledge could offer both biodiversity conservation and food security
benefits. Despite these efforts, the Nainital region still lacks exhaustive ethnobotanical
documentation compared to other parts of the Central Himalayas. As noted by Hussain et al.
(2008) and Abbasi et al. (2010), although numerous studies exist for the Northwestern and
Eastern Himalayas, systematic surveys focusing specifically on the Central Himalayan
regions like Nainital remain limited.

In recent years, awareness of the need for sustainable management of wild edible plants has
grown. Studies by Shrestha and Dhillion (2003) and Samant and Pal (2003) advocate for the
integration of indigenous knowledge into conservation planning to maintain both biodiversity
and cultural traditions. Ethnobotany in the Himalayan region, particularly in Uttarakhand,
reflects the deep connection between local communities and plant resources. Several studies
have highlighted the cultural, medicinal, and ecological importance of traditional plant
knowledge. A study by Aravind Kumar (2017) in the Garhwal region of Uttarakhand found
that despite the area's rich diversity of medicinal plants, rapid tourism growth and urban
expansion are harming its biodiversity. The research documented 242 medicinal plant
species, out of which a significant number were found to be endangered or under threat. The
study emphasized the need to balance tourism development with conservation measures to
protect these valuable resources​.

In Bageshwar district, another research effort recorded 144 medicinal plant species used by
locals to treat 49 different health conditions. The study noted that most commonly used plants
were herbs, and leaves and roots were the most used parts. This research employed
participatory rural appraisal techniques and involved local healers in documenting plant uses,
reflecting the continued reliance of rural people on traditional medicine​. Similarly, in Jakholi
Block of Rudraprayag district, 78 plant species were identified for their medicinal use. The
study showed that people mostly use herbs in the form of pastes and juices to treat ailments
like skin diseases and digestive issues. The researchers also reported that plant knowledge is
at risk due to lack of documentation and the out-migration of youth​. A recent study in
Pithoragarh district focused specifically on the use of medicinal plants for treating skin
diseases. It revealed that many traditional remedies are still widely used and trusted, although
some plants are now becoming scarce. This scarcity was linked to overharvesting and loss of
natural habitats​.

A broader review by Bargali et al. (2022) also confirmed the ecological richness of
Uttarakhand. The region is home to over 5,000 vascular plant species, and about one-third of
these have medicinal uses. However, the review pointed out that lower Himalayan and
sub-Himalayan zones are understudied, and there is an urgent need to document and preserve
both plant diversity and associated traditional knowledge​.

In a recent Study in and around Nainital, According to Neetu Bohra (2018), 113 wild edible
plant species from 57 families were documented in Nainital district. The majority were trees

8
(40%), followed by herbs (29%) and shrubs (26%). Various plant parts, such as tubers,
leaves, fruits, and roots, were used as food supplements. Bohra further noted that these plants
contribute significantly to local food security and income generation, although both the plants
and the associated indigenous knowledge are under threat, highlighting the need for
conservation and sustainable use. Local communities in the Nainital district depend on wild
edible plants to help them meet their daily dietary needs, according to Bohra (2018).
According to the study, these plants were seriously threatened by human activity, particularly
habitat destruction. Lack of access to seedlings or saplings was a major obstacle, despite the
villagers' expressed willingness to cultivate wild edible species. Both in-situ and ex-situ
conservation strategies are important, according to the research.

Numerous studies have been carried out throughout the Indian Himalayan Region (IHR) with
a focus on different aspects like plant diversity, ecological characteristics, ethnobotanical
knowledge, and the conservation of wild and endangered species, according to a thorough
review of existing literature. The works of Jain and Rao (1983), Gaur and Semwal (1983),
Goel and Bhattachacharya (1983), Hajra (1983a, 1983b), Pangtey and Samant (1988), and a
number of studies conducted by Samant and associates from 1993 to 2007 are notable
contributions in this area. Arya (2002), Joshi (2002), Samant et al. (2002), Joshi and Samant
(2004), Pant and Samant (2007), and Pandey (2006).

2.1
Research gap
Even with a lot of Himalayan region ethnobotanical records, Particularly in Nainital Forest,
there is a clear knowledge vacuum regarding the retention and intergenerational passing on of
traditional plant knowledge. While most earlier studies have concentrated on cataloging plant
species and their uses, few have investigated how ethnobotanical knowledge differs among
various age groups within local communities.

By means of an extensive literature review and field observations carried out in communities
around Nainital, it became clear that younger generations are fast losing traditional
knowledge of plant identification and use. Interviews for the study included people ranging in
age from their 20s to over 90 years. The data revealed a clear trend:

Senior citizens (above 50 years) had thorough and accurate knowledge of local flora,
including accurate identification, traditional uses (especially medicinal), and seasonal
availability.

Middle-aged adults (30s to 50s) kept modest degrees of plant knowledge, usually limited to
commonly used species or those passed on directly through family or employment (e.g.,
farming).

Young adults (20s to early 30s) Particularly with regard to local plant species, especially
medicinal plants, young adults (20s to early 30s) displayed a significant ignorance. Most
couldn't even recognize often used traditional herbs.

9
Therefore, the research gap addressed in this study is the age-wise decline in ethnobotanical
knowledge, with a focus on how this erosion impacts the continuity of traditional ecological
practices. This gap needs urgent attention to develop community-based strategies for
knowledge preservation and intergenerational learning.

10
CHAPTER- 3 Materials and methods

3.1 Description of Study area:

The ethnobotanical survey was conducted in the Nainital Forest Division, in Nainital district,
Uttarakhand. The study sites were selected between 1500-2000 m above mean sea level in
Nainital district, Uttarakhand. This area mainly lies in the hilly tract of the district Nainital,
Kumaun Himalaya (Figure 3.1). Five Villages were selected for the present Ethnobotanical
study viz. Pangot, Malla bagad, Haryal, Ghughukham and Saur.

The primary objective of the study was to document the traditional knowledge of local
communities regarding the use of native plant species for medicinal, cultural, and daily life
purposes. The selection of villages was based on different altitudinal zones, and the
availability of traditional knowledge holders in the area.

Figure1. Study area map of Nainital

Figure 2. Pangot village map

11
Figure 3 Malla bagad village map

Figure 4. Ghughukham village map

12
Figure 5. Haryal village map

Figure 6. Saur village map

13
3.6 About villages
Pangot - Pangot is a small Village at 2000 mt elevation

Malla bagad - malla bagad is a big and populated village it lies from 1500 mt elevation to
1900 mt elevation ,

Ghughukham - Ghughukham is also located near Pangot , at 2000 mt elevation

Haryal - Haryal village is also situated near Ghugham village at 2100 mt. elevation

Saur - Saur is a largest village in this this landscape which lies from 1400mt to 2000 mt
elevation

3.7 Methods
The present ethnobotanical study was conducted in five villages around Nainital district,
Uttarakhand, situated in the Central Himalayan region. These villages were selected based on
their close association with forest ecosystems, reliance on natural resources, and the presence
of traditional knowledge holders.

Both qualitative and quantitative methods were employed in the study to record traditional
plant knowledge, including species used, local names, purposes (e.g., medicinal, edible,
fodder, fuel, etc.), plant parts used, and preparation methods. Interviews were conducted with
50 informants representing a range of ages, from 20 to 92. Plants were identified in their

14
native habitat and their applications were thoroughly discussed during field surveys and plant
walks led by local elders and guides.

I used a semi-structured questionnaire to gather information about local plants, and

interviews were carried out in Hindi and Kumaoni so people felt comfortable and could
explain things clearly. When informants talked about different plants,I photographed some of
them, collected samples, and identified them with the Help of the Department Faculty and
previous research papers. To figure out how important each plant is in local traditions, I
calculated the Use Value (UV) with the formula UV = ∑U/N, where U is the number of uses
mentioned by all informants and N is the total number of people we spoke to. I organized and
analyzed all the data in Google doc.

A total of 50 individuals were interviewed across the five villages. Participants included both
men and women from diverse age groups (ranging from 25 to 92 years old), ensuring that the
study captured knowledge from elderly community members, who are often the primary
holders of traditional wisdom, as well as younger generations, to understand the continuity
and changes in ethnobotanical practices.

Data Collection Tools and Techniques

The survey followed a structured and semi-structured interview format, combining
open-ended questions with guided conversations. Interviews were conducted in the local
language (mostly Hindi or regional dialects) to ensure comfort and clarity for the
respondents. The following methods were used:

●​ Direct interviews using a pre-prepared questionnaire.

●​ Free listing of plant species and their uses by participants.
●​ Participant observation, including guided walks with local informants to identify
and collect plant specimens in the wild.
●​ Focus group discussions in some villages to cross-check and validate the information
gathered.​

Data Recording and Plant Identification

Detailed notes were taken during each interview, including information on local plant names,
parts used, methods of preparation, and cultural significance. Photographs of plants and usage
practices were also taken where possible.

Prior informed consent was obtained from all participants before conducting the interviews.
The purpose of the study was clearly explained, and participants were assured that their
knowledge would be used solely for academic and conservation purposes, with respect for
their intellectual property rights.

15
Survey Design

●​ Study Area: Five villages near the Nainital forest

●​ Sample Size: 50 participants
●​ Demographics: Participants were selected across various age groups and genders to
ensure diverse representation
●​ Data Collection Method: Semi-structured interviews and direct observation

Data Collection

The survey employed semi-structured interviews to record ethnobotanical knowledge.

Participants were asked about:

1.​ The local names and uses of plants

2.​ Medicinal applications and preparation methods
3.​ Seasonal variations in plant availability
4.​ Perceptions regarding changes in plant availability due to environmental or
socio-economic factors

Additionally, direct field observations were conducted to cross-verify the information

provided by participants. The collected data was analyzed to identify patterns in plant use,
knowledge distribution among different age groups, and the impact of modernization on
traditional plant knowledge.

Data Analysis

The data was analyzed using both qualitative and quantitative methods:

●​ Descriptive Statistics: Used to summarize demographic details, plant usage

frequency, and variations in knowledge distribution.
●​ Comparative Analysis: Examined how plant knowledge varied across different age
groups and occupations.
●​ Content Analysis: Categorized plant uses based on medicinal, food, and cultural
significance.
●​ Correlation Analysis: Assessed relationships between education levels and the depth
of ethnobotanical knowledge.

16
Chapter 4 Results

4.1
Ethnobotanical plants and uses reported by the informants

A total of 57 plant species from 36 families were identified by the ethnobotanical study
conducted in the Nainital area. Local communities have long utilized these species for
construction, rituals, food, medicine, fuel, fiber, and fodder. The species that have been
identified are a reflection of both the region's ecological diversity and the generations-old
indigenous knowledge systems.

With seven species overall, the Rosaceae family had the highest representation among these.
This implies that Rosaceae plants are important in traditional practices, perhaps because of
their medicinal qualities, edible fruits, and ecological abundance in the mid-hill regions of the
Himalayas. Their extensive use in daily life for food, medicine, fodder, fuel, and rituals is
demonstrated by the notable representation of several families, including Poaceae (4
species), Rutaceae (3 species), and Polygonaceae (3 species).Two species each were found in
other families, such as the Asteraceae, Asparagaceae, Berberidaceae, Caesalpiniaceae,
Dioscoreaceae, Fagaceae, Pinaceae, and Urticaceae, indicating a moderate but significant
role in ethnobotanical applications.

Remarkably, only one species each represented 24 of the 36 families. These include species
that are used in very particular or culturally distinctive ways, as well as well-known
medicinal plants. This demonstrates that ethnobotanical knowledge encompasses not only
well-known plant groups but also lesser-known species that play specialized roles in regional
customs and ecosystems. ( Table 1)

Table 1. THe list of the species and family observed in the five study sites.

No. of
S. No. Family Name Species Scientific name
1 Acanthaceae 1 Dicliptera tinctoria
2 Arecaceae 1 Trachycarpus takil
3 Asparagaceae 2 Agave cantula, Asparagus racemosus
4 Asteraceae 2 Ageratina adenophora, Artemisia spp.
5 Athyriaceae 1 Diplazium esculentum
6 Begoniaceae 1 Bergenia ciliata
7 Berberidaceae 2 Berberis aristata, Berberis chitria

17
8 Betulaceae 1 Alnus nepalensis
9 Bombacaceae 1 Bombax ceiba
10 Cannabaceae 1 Cannabis sativa
11 Caprifoliaceae 1 Valeriana jatamansi
12 Caesalpiniaceae 2 Bauhinia variegata, Bauhinia vahlii
13 Dioscoreaceae 2 Dioscorea belophylla, Dioscorea bulbifera
14 Ericaceae 1 Rhododendron arboreum
15 Euphorbiaceae 1 Euphorbia royleana
16 Fabaceae 1 Indigofera cassioides
17 Fagaceae 2 Quercus leucotrichophora, Quercus floribunda
18 Gentianaceae 1 Swertia chirayita
19 Lamiaceae 1 Clinopodium vulgare
20 Lythraceae 1 Punica granatum
21 Malvaceae 1 Grewia optiva
22 Menispermaceae 1 Tinospora cordifolia
23 Moraceae 1 Ficus hederacea
24 Myricaceae 1 Myrica esculenta
25 Orchidaceae 1 Pholidota articulata
26 Phytolaccaceae 1 Phytolacca acinosa
27 Pinaceae 2 Cedrus deodara, Pinus roxburghii
28 Plantaginaceae 1 Plantago indica
Cymbopogon citratus, Dendrocalamus strictus,
29 Poaceae 4 Eulaliopsis binata, Thysanolaena latifolia
Fagopyrum esculentum, Rumex hastatus, Rumex
30 Polygonaceae 3 nepalensis
31 Pteridaceae 1 Adiantum spp.
32 Ranunculaceae 1 Thalictrum foliolosum
Cotoneaster microphyllus, Potentilla indica, Prunus
cerasoides, Pyracantha crenulata, Pyrus pashia, Rubus
33 Rosaceae 7 ellipticus, Rubus nivens
34 Rubiaceae 1 Himalrandia tetrasperma
Bergera koenigii, Skimmia anquetilia, Zanthoxylum
35 Rutaceae 3 armatum
36 Urticaceae 2 Debregeasia salicifolia, Girardinia diversifolia

18
Figure 7. Graphical representation of the family and percentage of species occurred in
the study sites.

Table 2. Use Category of Plants in the study area.

Sr. no. Use category No. of species

1 Medicinal 17

2 Aromatic 6

3 Fodder/forage/Fuelwood 7

4 Wild edible 18

5 Cultural/ Religious 3

4.1.1
Medicinal Plant Use
Local communities in and around the Nainital Forest have long utilized a wide variety of
medicinal plants, according to the ethnobotanical study. 17 plant species, including a diverse
range of plant types like herbs, shrubs, trees, and climbers, have been documented for their
medicinal uses. Ageratina adenophora,Asparagus racemosus,Berberis chitria,Berberis
aristata,Bergenia ciliata,Bergera koenigii,Cannabis sativa,Clinopodium vulgare,Euphorbia
royleana,Ficus hederacea,Girardinia diversifolia,Indigofera cassioides,Myrica
esculenta,Pholidota articulata,Phytolacca acinosa,Plantago indica,Punica granatum,
Pyracantha crenulata, Rhododendron arboreum, Rumex hastatus,Rumex nepalensis,Swertia
chirayita, and Tinospora cordifolia.

19
 These plants are used to treat a wide range of illnesses, such as rheumatism and diabetes
(Berberis chitria, Tinospora cordifolia), women's health (Asparagus racemosus), bone and
wound healing (Pholidota articulata, Prunus cerasoides), fever and infections (Berberis
aristata, Swertia chirayita), and digestive problems (Plantago indica). The extensive use of
these species by local informants highlights the cultural significance of plant-based healing
systems and the ingrained ethnomedicinal knowledge. As part of community-based
conservation strategies, these findings highlight the importance of preserving traditional
knowledge and using local medicinal plants sustainably. (Table 3)

Table 3. The use of medicinal plants in the study area, informed by the local
communities living in the study region

sr. Vernacular Used

no. Botanical Name Family Name Part(s) Primary Medicinal Use
Ageratina
1 adenophora Asteraceae Kala basa Leaf Healing properties
Fruit,
2 Berberis chitria Berberidaceae Kilmora Root Diabetes, jaundice, rheumatism
Fruit,
3 Berberis aristata Berberidaceae - Root Fever, eye complaints
4 Bergenia ciliata Begoniaceae Silphora Root Kidney and gall bladder stone
Digestive, tonic, diarrhoea,
5 Bergera koenigii Rutaceae Kari patta Leaf dysentery
Fruit,woo
6 Myrica esculenta Myricaceae Kafal d Medicinal, antibacterial

7 Pholidota articulata Orchidaceae Harjojan Leaf Joint bone fracture

Leaf,
8 Phytolacca acinosa Phytolaccaceae Jarak Seed Anti-inflammatory
9 Plantago indica Plantaginaceae Isabgol Leaf Digestive issues
Diarrhea, heart health,
10 Punica granatum Lythraceae Daadim Fruit antioxidant
Wounds, antidote for scorpion
11 Rumex hastatus Polygonaceae Chilmora Leaf sting (bichu buti)
Wounds, antidote for scorpion
12 Rumex nepalensis Polygonaceae Jungli palak Leaf sting
Fever, diabetes, liver ailments,
13 Swertia chirayita Gentianaceae Chirayita Leaf digestion

14 Tinospora cordifolia Menispermaceae Gurj Leaf, Diabetes, arthritis, allergy, ulcer

20
 Fruit,
Root
Thalictrum Pissumaar, Livestock ectoparasites
15 foliolosum Ranunculaceae Mameera Leaf treatment
Sameva,
16 Valeriana jatamansi Caprifoliaceae Jatamansi Root Animal insect relief
Zanthoxylum Seed,
17 armatum Rutaceae Timru wood Toothache

4.1.2
Aromatic Plants
In traditional practices, the aromatic plants Artemisia spp., Cedrus deodara, Cymbopogon
citratus, Clinopodium vulgare, Skimmia anquetilia, and Zanthoxylum armatum are
significant. They are prized for their inherent scents and applications in food, medicine, and
religious ceremonies. For instance, Zanthoxylum armatum seeds have both culinary and
spiritual uses, while Cedrus deodara is valued for its sacred wood and aroma in ceremonies.
These plants demonstrate the intimate connection between nature, local culture, and health,
emphasizing the importance of protecting both the species and indigenous knowledge. (Table
4)

Table 4. The use of aromatic plants in the study area, informed by the local communities
living in the study region

Vernacular
sr. no. Botanical Name Family Name Used Part(s)
1 Artemisia spp. Asteraceae Paati Leaf

2 Cedrus deodara Pinaceae Deodara Timber, Resin

3 Cymbopogon citratus Poaceae - Leaf

4 Clinopodium vulgare Lamiaceae Van tulsi Leaf

5 Skimmia anquetilia Rutaceae Nairpaati Leaf

6 Zanthoxylum armatum Rutaceae Timru Seed

21
 4.1.3
Fodder and Fuelwood
Approximately species were noted as important sources of fodder for livestock, especially
during the lean winter months. Key fodder plants included Quercus leucotrichophora and
Grewia optiva. Fuelwood was primarily sourced from Pinus roxburghii, Oak, and other local
tree species. (Table 5)

Table 5. The consumptions of different part of species for fodder and fuelwood by local
communities

sr. no. Botanical Name Family Vernacular Name Used Part(s)

1 Debregeasia salicifolia Urticaceae Tushyari Leaf

2 Eulaliopsis binata Poaceae Baabil Grass Fruit, Root

3 Grewia optiva Malvaceae Bhimal Leaf, Fiber

4 Quercus leucotrichophora Fagaceae Banj Leaf, Seed

5 Quercus floribunda Fagaceae Moru Leaf, Seed

6 Alnus nepalensis Betulaceae Atis Timber

7 Pinus roxburghii Pinaceae Chir Timber, Resin, Leaf

4.1.4
Cultural and Religious Uses
Numerous plant species have significant cultural and religious significance, according to the
ethnobotanical survey conducted in the villages surrounding Nainital. Rituals, seasonal
celebrations, and significant life events like births, marriages, and funerals all make extensive
use of these plants. During ceremonies, leaves, flowers, wood, and resins are frequently used
as offerings, incense, or holy materials.

Certain plants are also thought to be protective and are positioned at entrances or on rooftops
to ward off natural forces or evil spirits. A deep spiritual connection between the community
and its natural environment is reflected in these customs.

Crucially, cultural reverence for some plants promotes their preservation, aiding in the
preservation of regional biodiversity. Therefore, the use of plants in culture and religion is
essential to maintaining ecological balance and spiritual heritage. (Table 6 )

22
 Table 6. Cultural and religious use of different plants by the local communities of the
study area

sr. Botanical Vernacular Used

no. Name Family Name Part(s) Cultural/Religious Use
Euphorbia Euphorbiace Syun (Danda Placed on roofs to protect
1 royleana ae Thor) Leaf against lightning
Prunus Wood used in religious
2 cerasoides Rosaceae Pdam (Payya) Leaf ceremonies
Zanthoxylum Seed, Religious ceremonial use and
3 armatum Rutaceae Timru Timber natural fragrance

4.1.5
Wild Edibles and Other Uses
Near the nainital Forest villages, edible plants are an essential part of the local communities'
ethnobotanical knowledge. A wide variety of plant parts, such as fruits, leaves, flowers,
seeds, and tubers, are consumed by the species under survey, indicating both seasonal
dependence and dietary diversity.

Bauhinia variegata and Bombax ceiba are notable edible species whose leaves and flowers
are used as traditional vegetables. Commonly foraged and consumed wild fruits, like Pyrus
pashia (Mehal), Rubus ellipticus (Hisalu), and Myrica esculenta (Kafal), are prized for their
nutritional and therapeutic qualities. Important seasonal food sources also include leafy
greens like Diplazium esculentum (Lingur) and air fruit like Dioscorea spp. (Gethi).

These plants symbolize traditional ecological knowledge that has been passed down through
the generations, in addition to serving as a dietary supplement for the locals. The necessity of
conserving biodiversity and protecting both species and indigenous knowledge systems is
underscored by the reliance on wild edibles. (Table 7)

Table 7 Wild Edibles Plants consumption by locals community of the region.

sr. no. Botanical Name Family Vernacular Name Used Part(s)

1 Bauhinia vahlii Caesalpiniaceae Maloo Leaf, Fruit
2 Berberis chitria Berberidaceae Kilmora Fruit
Cotoneaster
3 microphyllus Rosaceae Guwai Fruit

4 Dioscorea belophylla Dioscoreaceae Gethi Fruit

23
 5 Dioscorea bulbifera Dioscoreaceae Gethi Fruit

6 Diplazium esculentum Athyriaceae Lingur Leaf

7 Fagopyrum esculentum Polygonaceae Uggal (Buckwheat) Seed

8 Ficus hederacea Moraceae Dudhi Leaf, Fruit, Root

9 Girardinia diversifolia Urticaceae Aawa Leaf

10 Indigofera cassioides Fabaceae Sageena Flowers

11 Myrica esculenta Myricaceae Kafal Fruit

12 Potentilla indica Rosaceae Ban kafal Fruit

13 Punica granatum Lythraceae Daadim Fruit

14 Pyracantha crenulata Rosaceae Ghingaru Fruit

15 Pyrus pashia Rosaceae Mehal Fruit

16 Rubus ellipticus Rosaceae Hisalu Fruit

17 Rubus nivens Rosaceae Kala Hisalu Fruit
Quercus
18 leucotrichophora Fagaceae Banj Seed

4.2 Use Value (UV) Analysis

Use Value (UV) is a quantitative measure that reflects the relative importance of each plant
species based on the number of uses reported by informants. In this study, the UV values
ranged from 0.02 to 1, indicating considerable variation in the knowledge and usage
frequency of different species within the local communities of Nainital.

High Use Value (UV ≥ 1.0): Species such as Quercus floribunda (1), Bergera koenigii (1),
and Berberis chitria (1) show extensive use, signifying their critical roles in local livelihoods,
medicine, and culture.​

Moderate Use Value (UV 0.5 - 0.99): Plants like Asparagus racemosus (0.98), Bombax
ceiba (0.94), and Debregeasia salicifolia (0.88) indicate specialized uses, often medicinal or
seasonal.​

24
Low Use Value (UV < 0.5): Species such as Adiantum spp. (0.06) and Dicliptera tinctoria
(0.02) are less frequently used or known, which could be due to rarity or cultural shifts.
(Figure 12.)

Figure 8. Deterioration of ethnobotanical knowledge across age groups

Figure 9. Demographics: Number and gender of informants

25
Figure 10. Classification-wise Distribution of Plant Species

Figure 11. Representation of % of plant parts used

26
Figure 12. Distribution of Ethnobotanical Use Values of Documented Plant Species

27
Chapter 5 Discussion

The ecological richness and biological diversity of the Indian Himalayan Region (IHR),
which spans roughly 2,500 km and occupies an area of 236,900 km² (Khoshoo, 1991), are
widely recognized. The area is home to a variety of forest types, including alpine and tropical
ecosystems, as well as traditional mountain communities that greatly depend on forest
resources for their survival and well-being. In this light, the Kumaun Himalaya's Nainital
district stands out as a microcosm of the region's greater biodiversity.

Five altitudinally diverse locations—Pangot, Malla Bagad, Saur, Ghughukham, and

Haryal—ranging in elevation from 1,200 to 2,000 meters above sea level were used for the
current study. Local communities have preserved and applied a wealth of ethnobotanical
knowledge at these important forest-agriculture interfaces. The Nainital district is home to
more than 1,600 vascular plant species, including trees, shrubs, herbs, and climbers,
according to the field-based floristic inventory.

This study's main goal is to thoroughly record the ethnobotanical knowledge that the local
populations in the villages around Nainital possess. The goal of this study is to document the
traditional medical, nutritional, cultural, and commercial applications of local plants. The
study also intends to evaluate how much of this indigenous knowledge is being lost or
retained by various age groups within these communities. In order to illustrate the effects of
modernization, shifting lifestyles, and generational changes on the preservation of traditional
plant-based practices, the research shows how ethnobotanical knowledge changes with
age.(Figure 8).

The villages surrounding Nainital have a rich ethnobotanical diversity, which is highlighted
in this study. In all, 57 plant species from 36 families were identified, each with a range of
traditional applications. Because they are used for medicinal purposes, fodder, fuelwood,
religious rites, aromatic applications, vegetables, and edible fruit, these species are essential
to the local economy and cultural customs. This wide variety of applications highlights the
study area's distinctive botanical legacy. In particular, there are 17 species of plants that are
used medicinally, 6 that are used for aromatic purposes, 7 that are used as fodder, forage, or
fuelwood, 18 that provide edible fruits or vegetables in the wild, and 3 that have cultural or
religious significance. (Table 2)

When compared to the larger IHR datasets—such as the 675 WEP species (Samant and Dhar,
1997), 1,748 medicinal species (Samant et al., 1998b), and 279 fodder species (Samant,
1998)—the Villages around Nainital demonstrates significant localized diversity. Although
smaller in scale, this region mirrors the broader Himalayan ethnobotanical patterns,
indicating the strong dependence of mountain communities on their immediate natural
resources. The presence of over 17 medicinal plant species, 7 fodder and fuel species,18
WEP species and 3 Religious or culturally important plant species Around the Nainital also

28
aligns well with the larger regional findings. Among the most widely used and culturally
important species in the study areas are Diplazium esculentum, Pyrus pashia, Berberis
asiatica, Quercus leuchotrichophora, Quercus floribunda and Skimmia anquetilia. Foraged
for their fruits, leaves, roots, and young shoots, these are frequently used as seasonal
vegetables and in local medicine. The variety of applications demonstrates how resilient and
flexible traditional ecological knowledge systems are across the region's ethnic groups.

One of the most concerning observations during this study was the rapid decline of traditional
plant knowledge among younger generations. Out of 50 people interviewed—10 young
adults, 22 adults, and 18 senior citizens—it was mostly the elders and older adults who could
accurately identify and describe the use of medicinal plants. Many young respondents were
unfamiliar with even commonly used herbs like Plantago ovata, Berberis asiatica, and
Bergenia ciliata. This gap suggests a growing disconnect, likely driven by formal education
systems that rarely incorporate local knowledge, along with lifestyle changes, and migration
to cities. These concerns echo what researchers like Kala (2005) and Kunwar et al. (2013)
have warned about for years. However, knowledge is not evenly spread. In families where
both parents are engaged in farming or forest work, children tend to learn more about plants
through daily observation. In contrast, children from households where parents work outside
the village, especially in tourism or government jobs, often show less familiarity with local
herbs. This was evident when some younger villagers could identify modern branded
medicines by name, but struggled to name five local medicinal plants growing near their own
fields.

Still, Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) remains strong among certain

groups—especially women above the age of 40 and elders, and professions like forest
watchers. Senior citizens in particular often play a key role in passing on knowledge of herbal
remedies, child care practices, and local food traditions. This knowledge is not just
practical—it’s deeply personal and rooted in day-to-day life. Yet, with fewer opportunities to
pass this information on orally, and less interest from younger people, there's a real risk that
this valuable wisdom could fade away.

Cultural and religious practices, too, are tightly linked with plant use. Festivals like Harela,
along with local sayings and spiritual customs, reflect a worldview that treats nature with
reverence and care. But once again, this cultural thread is thinning among younger people,
weakening the bond between tradition and environment. Sometimes, even plants that are not
native to the area become part of the local tradition through use and acceptance. Argentina
adenophora(kala bansa), once introduced for ornamental, is now used in household remedies
for Healing the wound. Such practices are rarely found in written texts but are powerful
indicators of adaptive knowledge.

Agricultural changes are also affecting plant knowledge. With the shift towards commercial
crops and hybrid seeds, people are now less likely to maintain kitchen gardens or collect wild
vegetables. Many said they miss the taste of Fiddlehead ferns (Linguda), Fagopyrum
esculentum(Buckwheat) and Chenopodium leaves (Bathua), which were once common in

29
home-cooked meals. This decline is not just a change in food habits—it also reduces contact
with the forest, the soil, and the seasonal rhythm that once guided their choices.

In sum, this study highlights the richness of local ethnobotanical knowledge—but also the
serious threat it faces due to generational shifts. As older generations pass on, their
knowledge often isn't being picked up by the youth. Preserving this heritage requires more
than documentation; it calls for schools, families, and communities to work together to keep
these traditions alive.

30
Chapter 6 Conclusion
The present study aims to study ethnobotanical diversity around the villages of Nainital forest
. Study was conducted within a specific and limited time frame, with restricted access to
certain field sites. Therefore, it can be considered a preliminary investigation. Despite these
limitations, the research successfully documented 57 plant species from 36 families used by
local communities for various purposes. This study holds significant value not only for
ethnobotanical understanding but also because the area falls within the Nanda Devi Bird
Sanctuary, which was declared a protected area around 2016.

Before the declaration of the sanctuary, many local people were directly dependent on forest
resources for food, fuel, fodder, and medicine. However, after 2016, with the implementation
of conservation regulations, the local livelihoods began shifting toward other sectors, such as
tourism, small-scale businesses, and wage labor. While this shift reduced some pressure on
forests, it also introduced new ecological threats, such as construction activities, road
development, and the movement of heavy vehicles use, which present difficulties for the
populations of wild plants and the delicate ecosystem.

This study highlights the Deterioration of ethnobotanical knowledge across age groups in the
region. It also reveals that local communities still possess rich traditional knowledge and are
willing to cultivate certain wild species if they are supported with seedlings and training.

The findings emphasize that further detailed research is required to understand the nutritional,
medicinal, and economic potential of the documented species. Moreover, integrating local
knowledge with scientific conservation practices could lead to effective strategies for in-situ
and ex-situ conservation.

31
 Table 8. Ethnobotanical uses of plants Around the Nainital Villages

sr.no. Botanical name family Vernacular Part used Use description

name
1 Adiantum capillus Pteridaceae Hansraj Leaf Used as a shampoo
2 Ageratina adenophora Asteraceae Kala basa Leaf Healing properties
3 Agave cantula Asparagaceae rambas Leaf Fiber materials,
4 Alnus nepalensis Betulaceae atis Wood Fuel wood
5 Artemisia spp. Asteraceae Paati Leaf Natural Fragrance
6 Asparagus racemosus Asparagaceae Asperger Leaf Vegetable and Female tonic
Leaf,
7 Bauhinia variegata Caesalpiniaceae Kwiralu Flowers,Wood Vegetable
Leaf,Fruit,Woo
8 Bauhinia Vahlii Caesalpiniaceae Maloo d Edible seed
Edible fruit Used for curing diabetes,
9 Berberis chitria Berberidaceae Kilmora Fruit , Root jaundice and rheumatism.
10 Berberis aristata Berberidaceae Fruit , Root Fever, eye complaints
Used to treat Kidney and gall
11 Bergenia ciliata Begoniaceae Silphora Root bladder stone
12 Bombax ceiba Bombacaceae Semal Flowers,Wood Vegetable from its flower.
Leaves are digestive, tonic,used for
13 Bergera koenigii Rutaceae Kari patta Leaf diarrhoea, dysentery
Leaf,Seed,Stem Fiber materials, chutney from its
14 Cannabis sativa Cannabaceae Bhang , seed.
15 Cedrus deodara Pinaceae Deodara Timer, Resin Aromatic wood and timber .
Cotoneaster
16 microphyllus Rosaceae Guwai Fruit , Root Wild edible fruit.
17 Cymbopogon citratus Poaceae Leaf Aromatic, tea.
18 Clinopodium vulgare Lamiaceae Van tulsi Leaf aromatic, digestive, antimicrobial.
Leaf,Fruit,Woo
19 Debregeasia salicifolia Urticaceae Tushyari d Fodder
20 Dendrocalamus strictus Poaceae Ringal Stem,Leaf Used to make basket
21 Dicliptera tinctoria Acanthaceae Laal buti Flowers
22 Dioscorea belophylla Dioscoreaceae Gethi Fruit Edible fruit
23 Dioscorea bulbifera Dioscoreaceae Gethi Fruit
24 Diplazium esculentum Athyriaceae Lingur Leaf Edible

32
 used for tooth removal and is
commonly placed on roofs by
Syun (Danda households, believed to protect
25 Euphorbia royleana Euphorbiaceae Thor) Leaf against lightning.
26 Eulaliopsis binata Poceace Baabil Grass Leaf Fodder.
Uggal Leaf
27 Fagopyrum esculentum Polygonaceae (Buckwheat) Edible.
Leaf, Fruit and Milk enhancer for cattles , edible
28 Ficus hederacea Moraceae Dudhi Root fruit .
29 Girardinia diversifolia Urticaceae Aawa Leaf Edible, Fiber.
Leaf,Fibre,Woo
30 Grewia optiva Malvaceae Bhimal d Fiber materials, Fodder.
31 Indigofera cassioides Fabaceae Sageena Flowers Edible plant, antibacterial.
Himalrandia
32 tetrasperma Rubiaceae Gheri Leaf
Wild Edible Fruit, medicinal,
33 Myrica esculenta Myricaceae Kafal Fruit antibacterial.
34 Pholidota articulata Orchidaceae Harjojan Leaf Used to joint bone fracture.
Jarak (Indian
35 Phytolacca acinosa Phytolaccaceae pokeweed) Leaf,Seed anti-inflammatory, edible, toxic.
Timer,Resin,Le timber, resin, firewood,
36 Pinus roxburghii Pinaceae Chir af, insect-repellent.
37 Plantago indica Plantaginaceae isabgol Leaf treat digestive issues.
38 Potentilla indica Rosaceae Ban kafal Fruit Wild edible fruit,
Cut, wounds, wood useful in
39 Prunus cerasoides Rosaceae Pdam (Payya) Leaf,Wood religious ceremony.
40 Punica granatum Lythraceae Daadim Fruit Diarrhea, heart, antioxidant.
Wild edible fruit, leaf paste applied
41 Pyracantha crenulata Rosaceae Ghingaru Fruit on burns.
42 Pyrus pashia Rosaceae Mehal Fruit Wild edible fruit,
Quercus Wood,Leaf, Edible fruit,Fuel, fodder, timber,
43 leucotrichophora Fagaceae Banj Seed soil-conservation.
Wood,Leaf,
44 Quercus Floribunda Fagaceae Moru Seed Fodder, fuel, timber, erosion-control.
Rhododendron Juice,Dysentery, diarrhea, bleeding,
45 arboreum Ericaceae Buransh Flowers,Wood heart, tonic.

33
46 Rubus ellipticus Rosaceae Hisalu Fruit Edible fruit.
47 Rubus nivens Rosaceae Kala Hisalu Fruit Edible fruit.
48 Rumex hastatus Polygonaceae Chilmora Leaf Wounds, antidote for bichu buti
49 Rumex nepalensis Polygonaceae Jungli palak Leaf Wounds, antidote for bichu buti.
50 Skimmia anquetilia Rutaceae Nairpaati Leaf Aromatic.
Fever, diabetes, liver, parasites,
51 Swertia chirayita Gentianaceae Chirayita Leaf digestion.
52 Trachycarpus takil Arecaceae Thako Stem Useful in making broom.
Leaf, Fruit and
53 Tinospora cordifolia Menispermaceae Gurj Root Diabetes, arthritis, allergy, ulcer .
54 Thysanolaena latifolia Poaceae Aaoshi grass Leaf, Flowers To cure headache and stomachache.
Decoction is used to treat livestock
Pissumaar, affected by ectoparasites (e.g., mites,
55 Thalictrum foliolosum Ranunculaceae Mameera Leaf ticks, fleas).
Sameva, Used as a cure to animal’s insect
56 Valeriana jatamansi Caprifoliaceae Jatamansi Root relief.
Toothache, Natural Fragrance used
57 Zanthoxylum armatum Rutaceae Timru Seed, Timber as religious ceremonial activity.

34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
Name list of the participants

sr. no. Name Age

1 Balmi Budlakoti 50
2 Harish chandra joshi 56
3 Lokesh Budlakoti 22
4 Deepak Joshi 33
5 Lalita budlakoti 42
6 Bhuwan Arya 48
7 Pankaj Joshi 26
8 Lalita Arya 31
9 Preeti Joshi 27

42
10 Karuna Budlakoti 22
11 Amit Kumar 36
12 Tejpal Arya 58
13 Sambhu Das ji maharaj 57
14 Rakesh mehra 24
15 Keshar singh mehra 75
16 Janki Devi 34
17 Ranjendra Kumar 29
18 Gopal Ram 53
19 Maya Devi 48
20 Yamunanand Joshi 60
21 Mohan singh adhikari 50
22 Tara devi 78
23 Harendra rawat 34
24 Ravi rajwar 36
25 Vinod arya 45
26 Shanti adhikari 45
27 HImmat Singh Mehra 93
28 Sanjeev Tamta 24
29 Heera singh mehra 75
30 Kamla devi 70
31 Kunwar singh bisht 47
32 Neema bisht 46
33 Ankit singh bisht 24
34 Khushal Bisht 38
35 Haripriya bisht 68
36 Lal singh 54
37 Mohan chandra Arya 65
38 Tika Ram 43
39 Durga Devi 68
40 Parvati Devi 66
41 Diwan singh Mehra 60
42 Manju devi 38
43 Sarita Devi 42
44 Heera singh Mehra 75
45 Kamla devi 70
46 Chandan singh 47

43
 47 Ganga Ram 46
48 Balam singh Rautela 43
49 Chandan Thakur 25
50 Ashish Budlakoti 25

References:

●​ Jain, S. K. (1981). Glimpses of Indian Ethnobotany. New Delhi: Oxford & IBH
Publishing Co.

●​ Jain, S. K. (1987). Manual of Ethnobotany (2nd ed.). Jodhpur: Scientific Publishers.

●​ Kala, C. P. (2005). Ethnomedicinal botany of the Apatani in the Eastern Himalayan

region of India. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine,

●​ Samant, S. S., Dhar, U., & Palni, L. M. S. (1998). Medicinal Plants of Indian
Himalaya: Diversity Distribution Potential Values. Gyanodaya Prakashan, Nainital.

●​ Purohit, S. S., & Vyas, S. P. (2004). Medicinal Plant Cultivation: A Scientific

Approach. Agrobios (India).

●​ Negi, V. S., & Gaur, R. D. (1991). Traditional health care practices among the Bhotiya
tribal community of the Central Himalaya. Fitoterapia, 62(2), 133–139.
●​ Gaur, R. D. (1999). Flora of the District Garhwal, North West Himalaya. Srinagar:
Transmedia.

●​ Singh, V., & Kumar, P. (2000). Forest Flora of Nainital. Bishen Singh Mahendra Pal
Singh, Dehradun.

●​ Nautiyal, S., Kaechele, H., & Purohit, V. K. (2007). Ecological and socio-economic
impacts of non-timber forest product harvest: A case study from the Central
Himalayas. Ecology and Society, 12(2), 1–16.

44
●​ Rajwar, G. S., & Bhatt, Y. D. (1994). Traditional uses of plants in Nainital district.
Indian Journal of Forestry, 17(4), 307–311.

●​ Pant, S., & Tewari, L. M. (2014). Documentation of traditional knowledge on

medicinal plants in the Nainital region of Uttarakhand. International Journal of
Herbal Medicine, 2(3), 38–43.
●​ Dhar, U., Rawal, R. S., & Upreti, J. (2000). Setting priorities for conservation of
medicinal plants – A case study in the Indian Himalaya. Biological Conservation,
95(1), 57–65.

●​ Dhar, U., Rawal, R. S., & Upreti, J. (2000). Setting priorities for conservation of
medicinal plants – A case study in the Indian Himalaya. Biological Conservation,
95(1), 57–65.

●​ Awasthi, A. (2003). Traditional knowledge systems in Kumaun Himalaya: Use of

plants by rural communities. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 2(3),
245–256.​

●​ Bhatt, B. P., Singh, K., Sachan, M. S., & Singh, C. (2006). Traditional practices of
medicinal plants used by the tribes in Uttaranchal Himalaya. Indian Journal of
Forestry, 29(3), 295–302.​

●​ Upreti, K., & Pant, D. D. (1998). Medicinal plants used by the Bhotiya tribe of
Kumaon Himalaya. Journal of Economic and Taxonomic Botany, 22(3), 525–531.​

●​ Sati, V. P. (2008). Traditional knowledge of herbal medicines in the Uttarakhand

Himalaya. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 7(3), 389–392.​

●​ Tewari, L. M., Pant, S., Joshi, B. C., & Upreti, D. K. (2013). Floristic diversity and
indigenous uses of medicinal plants in Nainital district. Journal of Medicinal Plants
Research, 7(6), 280–289.​

●​ Kala, C. P. (2000). Status and conservation of rare and endangered medicinal plants in
the Indian trans-Himalaya. Biological Conservation, 93(3), 371–379.​

●​ Rawat, M. M. S., & Pangtey, Y. P. S. (1987). Plants used as ethnomedicine and

supplement food by tribals of Kumaon Himalaya. Journal of Economic and
Taxonomic Botany, 9, 139–142.​

●​ Nautiyal, B. P., et al. (2003). Agro Ecological zones and medicinal plant diversity in
Central Himalaya. Biodiversity and Conservation, 12(8), 1455–1470.​

45
●​ Dhar, U. (2002). In situ conservation of biodiversity in the Indian Himalayas: Value
addition through ethno-botanical knowledge. Current Science, 82(8), 898–903.​

●​ Kholia, B. S., & Rao, R. R. (2004). Indigenous herbal remedies of Kumaon Himalaya:
Inventory and current status. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 3(4),
365–377.
●​ Joshi, H. C., & Joshi, M. C. (2000). Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in
Almora district of Uttarakhand. Ethnobotany, 12, 76–80.​

●​ Pande, H. C., & Negi, G. C. S. (1993). Medicinal plants of Nainital district. Journal of
Economic and Taxonomic Botany, 17(3), 623–633.​

●​ Maikhuri, R. K., Semwal, R. L., Rao, K. S., & Saxena, K. G. (1998). Traditional
community-based forest management in Uttarakhand. Forest Ecology and
Management, 113(2–3), 149–165.​

●​ Singh, B., & Tewari, L. M. (2010). Traditional knowledge of wild edible plants in
Nainital region. International Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation, 2(3), 58–64.​

●​ Kapkoti, B., & Singh, V. (2015). Studies on ethnomedicinal plants of Bhimtal and
nearby villages. Journal of Medicinal Plants Studies, 3(5), 103–106.​

●​ Arya, S., Rawat, G. S., & Kala, C. P. (2002). Studies on plant wealth and ethnobotany
of Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve. Ethnobotany, 14, 55–64.

●​ Gaur, R. D. (1999). Flora of the District Garhwal, Northwest Himalaya. Transmedia

Publication, Srinagar (Garhwal).​

●​ Dhyani, P. P., & Nautiyal, M. C. (2004). Plant diversity and traditional knowledge in
Garhwal Himalaya. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 3(2), 229–236.​

●​ Bhatt, D., & Tewari, L. M. (2013). Ethnobotany of Garhwal Himalaya. International

Journal of Plant Research, 3(4), 45–53.​

●​ Singh, R. K., & Sundriyal, R. C. (2009). Wild edible plants of the Sikkim Himalaya:
Nutritional potential and ethnomedicinal values. Indian Journal of Traditional
Knowledge, 8(4), 560–565.

●​ Tiwari, B. K., Majumdar, R., & Bhatt, B. P. (2010). Documentation of traditional

knowledge of medicinal plants among the tribal communities of the North-Eastern
Himalaya. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 132(2), 486–497.​

46
●​ Kala, C. P. (2000). Status and conservation of rare and endangered medicinal plants in
the Indian trans-Himalaya. Biological Conservation, 93, 371–379.​

●​ Srivastava, T. N., et al. (1996). Medicinal Plants of Indian Himalaya. Indian Council
of Forestry Research and Education.​

●​ Nautiyal, B. P., et al. (2001). Cultivation of threatened medicinal plants in Uttaranchal

Himalaya. Current Science, 80(5), 559–564.​

●​ Jain, A., & Katewa, S. S. (1999). Traditional phytotherapy among tribal communities
of southern Rajasthan. Ethnobotany, 11, 1–7.

●​ Samant, S. S., & Dhar, U. (1997). Conservation priorities for wild edibles of Indian
Himalaya. The Environmentalist, 17, 261–268.​

●​ Sharma, L., & Badoni, A. (2012). Ethnobotanical survey of medicinal plants of

Jaunsar-Bawar region of Garhwal Himalaya. Journal of Pharmacy and Biological
Sciences, 3(6), 6–11.​

●​ Rana, J. C., & Rawat, G. S. (2017). Role of sacred groves in biodiversity conservation
of Western Himalaya. Journal of Biodiversity, 8(1), 14–23.​

●​ Uniyal, B. P., & Chauhan, N. S. (2001). Important medicinal plants of Indian

Himalayas. Indian Forester, 127(5), 611–624.​

●​ Negi, J. S., Bisht, V. K., & Bhandari, A. K. (2011). Chemical and ethnobotanical
aspects of Himalayan rhododendrons. Pharmacognosy Reviews, 5(10), 178–184.​

●​ Gupta, A. K. (1991). Frugal innovation and grassroots knowledge in Indian

ethnobotany. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 1(1), 15–23.​

●​ Bisht, M., & Rao, R. R. (2007). Ethnobotanical studies of the Bhotia tribe in the
Pithoragarh district. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 6(1), 199–206.​

●​ Singh, H. B., & Maheshwari, J. K. (1996). Indigenous knowledge and biodiversity

conservation in India. Journal of Ethnobiology, 16(2), 239–248.​

●​ Sati, B. (2004). Ethnobotanical beliefs and practices among the Bhotiya tribe.
Ethnobotany Leaflets, 8, 74–78.​

●​ Ghosh, P. (2008). Folk uses of plants among the Tharu tribe in Uttarakhand. Indian
Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 7(4), 595–599.

47
●​ Jain, S. K., & Rao, R. R. (1977). A Handbook of Field and Herbarium Methods.
Today & Tomorrow’s Printers.​

●​ Ambasta, S. P. (Ed.). (1986). The Useful Plants of India. CSIR, New Delhi.​

●​ Khare, C. P. (2007). Indian Medicinal Plants: An Illustrated Dictionary. Springer.​

●​ Kirtikar, K. R., & Basu, B. D. (1935). Indian Medicinal Plants (Vol. I–IV). Lalit
Mohan Basu.​

●​ Gaur, R. D. (2008). Flora of the District Nainital. Bishen Singh Mahendra Pal Singh.

●​ Singh, S., & Rai, S. C. (2009). Ethnomedicinal plants used by the tribes of
Uttarakhand. Ethnobotanical Leaflets, 13, 1198–1204.​

●​ Semwal, D. P., & Kumar, M. (2010). Current status of herbal drugs in the Himalayan
region. Journal of Herbal Medicine, 5(2), 27–33.​

●​ Bhattarai, S., Chaudhary, R. P., & Taylor, R. S. L. (2006). Ethnomedicinal plants used
by the people of Manang district, Central Nepal Himalaya. Ethnobotany Research and
Applications, 4, 211–225.​

●​ Kumar, A., & Bhatnagar, P. (2005). Statistical tools in ethnobotany. Journal of

Economic and Taxonomic Botany, 29(2), 285–291.​

●​ Pandey, G., & Joshi, M. C. (2012). Application of informant consensus factor in

ethnobotany: A case study from Uttarakhand. Indian Journal of Traditional
Knowledge, 11(3), 439–444.

●​ Singh, R., & Pandey, R. (2010). Wild vegetables of Kumaon. Indian Journal of Plant
Sciences, 3(4), 47–53.​

●​ Tiwari, J. K., & Rana, S. (2006). Wild edible fruits of the Central Himalaya:
Nutritional and cultural aspects. Indian Forester, 132(7), 894–900.​

●​ Negi, G. C. S., & Joshi, V. (2002). Traditional agroforestry systems and their role in
sustainable development of Central Himalaya. Journal of Hill Research, 15(2), 72–79.​

●​ Bisht, A. S. (2009). Traditional food systems in Uttarakhand. Mountain Research and

Development, 29(2), 131–139.​

●​ Rawat, M. S., & Kumar, D. (2001). Edible mushrooms in Uttarakhand: Traditional

knowledge. Journal of Non-Timber Forest Products, 8(1), 7–12.

48
●​ Cotton, C. M. (1996). Ethnobotany: Principles and Applications. John Wiley & Sons.​

●​ Martin, G. J. (2004). Ethnobotany: A Methods Manual. Earthscan.​

●​ Heinrich, M., et al. (2004). Ethnobotany and ethnopharmacology – Interdisciplinary

links with plant sciences. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 100(1–2), 1–11.​

●​ Balick, M. J., & Cox, P. A. (1996). Plants, People, and Culture: The Science of
Ethnobotany. Scientific American Library.​

●​ Schultes, R. E., & von Reis, S. (1995). Ethnobotany: Evolution of a Discipline.

Dioscorides Press.

●​ Turner, N. J., & Turner, K. L. (2008). Traditional knowledge erosion in plant use.
Human Ecology, 36(4), 461–477.​

●​ Singh, R. K., & Singh, B. (2015). Decline in traditional knowledge of medicinal

plants among Indian youth. Ethnobotany Research and Applications, 13, 377–385.​

●​ Kala, C. P. (2010). Youth and the loss of Himalayan plant knowledge. Indian Journal
of Traditional Knowledge, 9(4), 589–594.​

●​ Chaudhry, P., & Tewari, V. P. (2006). Sustainable development and changing cultural
values in the Himalayas. Indian Forester, 132(11), 1437–1444.​

●​ Rai, R. K., & Shrestha, N. (2011). Integrating local knowledge with conservation.
Mountain Research and Development, 31(3), 232–238.​

●​ Bhatt, B. P., & Verma, N. D. (2002). Ethnobotanical survey of medicinal plants used
by the tribes of Uttarakhand. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 1(1), 77–84.​

●​ Semwal, D. P., & Upreti, D. C. (2004). Ethnomedicinal plants of Kedarnath Wildlife

Sanctuary, Western Himalaya. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 3(2),
125–134.​

●​ Tiwari, J. K. (1995). Folk medicinal plants of Central Himalaya. Ethnobotany, 7(2),

45–50.​

●​ Shah, N. C. (1982). Herbal folk medicines in Northern India. Journal of

Ethnopharmacology, 6(3), 293–301.​

49
●​ Rawat, M. M. S., & Sharma, S. C. (2010). Traditional plant knowledge of Bhotiya
community in Niti Valley of Chamoli district. Ethnobotany, 22, 97–102.​

●​ Upreti, D. C., & Pant, G. (1996). Ethnobotanical uses of bryophytes from Garhwal
Himalaya. Journal of Economic and Taxonomic Botany, 20, 185–189.​

●​ Singh, V., & Rawat, G. S. (2011). Ethnobotanical survey of alpine pasture and
meadow plant diversity in Uttarakhand. Journal of Medicinal Plants Research, 5(24),
5892–5902.​

●​ Joshi, R. K. (2015). Ethnobotanical notes on wild vegetables used by Kumaoni tribes

of Uttarakhand. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 14(2), 293–298.​

●​ Gairola, S., Sharma, J., & Soni, V. (2010). Herbal plants used in the religious rituals
of Uttarakhand. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, 6(1), 1–6.​

●​ Tiwari, S., Singh, P., & Singh, L. (2017). Documentation of traditional knowledge of
medicinal plants from Pithoragarh district. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge,
16(4), 594–601.

●​ Ved, D. K., & Goraya, G. S. (2008). Demand and Supply of Medicinal Plants in India.
NMPB & FRLHT.​

●​ Kala, C. P. (2006). Medicinal plants used for gastrointestinal disorders in Uttarakhand

Himalaya. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 5(3), 351–357.​

●​ Nautiyal, M. C., & Nautiyal, B. P. (2004). Status of threatened medicinal plants in

protected areas of Uttarakhand. Tropical Ecology, 45(1), 23–29.​

●​ Singh, A., & Tewari, L. M. (2012). Traditional phytotherapy in the Bageshwar district
of Kumaun Himalaya. Journal of Herbal Medicine and Toxicology, 6(2), 17–22.​

●​ Bhatt, A., & Negi, G. C. S. (2006). Traditional knowledge and conservation of

medicinal plants by Bhotiya community. Mountain Research and Development, 26(4),
322–326.​

●​ Negi, V. S., & Gaur, R. D. (2010). Plants used in ethnoveterinary medicine in Garhwal
Himalaya. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 9(3), 524–528.​

●​ Purohit, A. N., & Nautiyal, B. P. (1981). Ethnobotany of some alpine plants from
Uttaranchal. Journal of Economic and Taxonomic Botany, 2, 545–550.​

50
●​ Kala, C. P. (2005). Indigenous uses, population density, and conservation of
threatened medicinal plants in protected areas of Indian Himalayas. Conservation
Biology, 19(2), 368–378.​

●​ Singh, S. K., & Rautela, P. (2013). Traditional herbal remedies of the hill people of
Uttarakhand. Journal of Applied and Natural Science, 5(2), 354–358.​

●​ Rana, J. C., Sharma, Y., & Negi, K. S. (2005). Utilization pattern of wild plants by
local inhabitants of Cold Desert in Himachal Pradesh. Journal of Non-Timber Forest
Products, 12(1), 19–26.​

●​ Uniyal, S. K., & Singh, K. N. (2000). Traditional uses of pteridophytes in Kumaon

Himalaya. Indian Fern Journal, 17, 38–44.​

●​ Das, K., & Dutta, A. K. (2007). Wild mushrooms of Central Himalaya:

Ethnomycological importance. Current Science, 92(12), 1681–1682.​

●​ Rawat, M. M. S., & Sati, V. P. (2005). Traditional uses of ferns by rural communities
in Garhwal Himalaya. Journal of Economic and Taxonomic Botany, 29(2), 287–290.​

●​ Singh, J., & Sharma, V. (2011). Edible wild mushrooms and their role in local
economy of the Uttarakhand region. International Journal of Forest Usufructs
Management, 12(2), 88–92.​

●​ Mishra, R., & Bhatt, A. (2014). Wild ferns and their ethnobotanical applications in
Uttarakhand. Asian Journal of Plant Science and Research, 4(5), 44–51.

51