Wild Edible Plants Used by the Polish Community in Misiones, Argentina

Monika Kujawska,Łukasz Łuczaj

doi:10.1007/s10745-015-9790-9

Abstract

We studied the cultural significance of wild edible plants for Eastern European migrants who settled in rural subtropical areas of South America. In 50 interviews with Polish migrants and their descendants in northern Misiones, Argentina, we recorded the use of 41 botanical species and two mushroom taxa. Different cultural significance indices were applied and sociodemographic factors such as gender, age and origin were addressed. Out of the ten most salient species, nine were fruits (Eugenia uniflora, Eugenia involucrata, Rollinia salicifolia, Campomanesia xanthocarpa, Syagrus romanzoffiana, Allophylus edulis, Plinia peruviana, Plinia rivularis, Eugenia pyriformis) and only one was a green vegetable (Hypochaeris chillensis). None of our informants reported famine foods, recreational teas or condiments. Men mentioned more wild edible species than women due to their more extensive knowledge of the forest plants growing further from settlements.

Highlights

Diverse factors such as modes of subsistence, economy, ecology and cultural attitudes shape people’s knowledge and use of wild edible plants
We recorded the use of 41 botanical species and two mushroom taxa among Polish migrants and their descendants (Table 1)
Wild fruits are the most appreciated resources and the most salient species used by the Polish community in Misiones

Summary

Introduction

Diverse factors such as modes of subsistence, economy, ecology and cultural attitudes shape people’s knowledge and use of wild edible plants. The contemporary fashion for wild edible plants among city dwellers is usually limited to identifiable and readily available species (Nolan 2001; Kujawska and Łuczaj 2010; Łuczaj et al 2012), with some specialized exceptions (Poe et al 2013). Since agriculturists use both cultivated and wild species, especially in times of food shortage and social unrest (Brown 1985; Huss-Ashmore and Johnston 1994), the distinction between cultivators and foragers is not obvious.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion