Art, fisheries and ethnobiology

Alpina Begossi,Rodrigo Caires

doi:10.1186/1746-4269-11-17

Abstract

BackgroundNature is perceived in a variety of forms, and the perception of nature can also be expressed in different ways. Local art may represent the perception of nature by humans. It can embody perception, imagination and wisdom. Local art, in particular, reflects how people interact with nature. For example, when studying the representation of fish by different cultures, it is possible to access information on the fish species found in the environment, on its relative importance, and on historical events, among others. In this context, art can be used to obtain information on historical events, species abundance, ecology, and behaviour, for example. It can also serve to compare baselines by examining temporal and spatial scales. This study aims to analyse art and nature from a human ecological perspective: art can understood as an indicator of fish abundance or salience.Art has a variety of dimensions and perspectives. Art can also be associated with conservation ecology, being useful to reinterpret ecological baselines. A variety of paintings on fish, as well as paintings from local art, are explored in this study. They are analyzed as representing important fish, spatially and historically.MethodsA survey regarding the fish found in different paintings was conducted using art books and museum books. Pictures were taken by visiting museums, particularly for local or traditional art (Australia and Cape Town).ResultsThe fish illustrated here seem to be commonly important in terms of salience. For example, Coryphaena spp. is abundant in Greece, Nile tilapia in Egypt, Gadus morhua in the Netherlands, as well as barracuda in Australia; salience is also applied to useful, noticeable or beautiful organisms, such as Carassius auratus (China). Another aspect of salience, the diversity of a group, is also represented by the panel where Uraspis uraspis appears to be depicted.ConclusionsRegarding the evaluation of baselines, we should consider that art may represent abundant fish in certain historic periods and geographic regions. Art could be an important temporal and geographical indicator to discover preterit information on the abundance of fish and compare it to present abundance.

Highlights

Ethnobotany as an academic discipline surfaced in the 19th century
Clement [12] categorises the development of ethnobiology as a discipline from the late 19th century onwards into three phases: (1) the preclassical period (1860–1899), when terms such as ethnobotany and ethnozoology were first coined, (2) the classical period (1950-1980s), when ethnobiologists started emphasizing more on ‘emic’ and (3) the post classical period (1990s), marked by the emergence of real collaborations between western scientists and indigenous people
If we consider the coining of the term ‘Aboriginal Botany’ in 1874 as the beginning point of academic ethnobiology, it has taken almost a century for ethnobiology to get started in Southeast Asia; like in Europe and elsewhere, Southeast Asian ethnobiologists initially focused on the medicinal uses of plants

Summary

Introduction

Ethnobotany as an academic discipline surfaced in the 19th century. Initially named ‘Aboriginal Botany’ by Powers in 1874 [1], the discipline received its widely accepted name from Harshberger in 1895 [2,3]. Clement [12] categorises the development of ethnobiology as a discipline from the late 19th century onwards into three phases: (1) the preclassical period (1860–1899), when terms such as ethnobotany and ethnozoology were first coined, (2) the classical period (1950-1980s), when ethnobiologists started emphasizing more on ‘emic’ and (3) the post classical period (1990s), marked by the emergence of real collaborations between western scientists and indigenous people. This study aims to provide an analysis of the current status of ethnobiology in Southeast Asia and outlines possibilities for future advancements

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion