Search bioRxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/bioRxiv

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2020.07.22.216689

Indigenous knowledge of plant uses by the community of Batiaghata, Khulna, Bangladesh

Ray, T.·Limon, M. S. H.·Tuhin, M. S. H.·Sharmin, A.
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Southwestern region of Bangladesh is very rich in floral diversity, and their diversified uses. An extensive survey was conducted to investigate ethnobotanical applications of botanical species by the community of Khulna, Bangladesh. We focused on plants and community relationships, identify the most important species used, determine the relative importance of the species surveyed and calculated the Fidelity level (FI) and Cultural Significance Index (CSI) concerning individual species. In total, we have listed 136 species of 114 genera under 52 families, of which 32% (45 species) were used for folk medicine. Inheritance of traditional knowledge of medicinal plants was the primary source of knowledge acquisition through oral transmission over the generations. However, only 34% of the informants were traditional herbal practitioners. Most of the medicinal uses are primly associated with anti-inflammatory, anti-microbial, antiseptic, expectorant, antidote, fever reduction, and pain relief.

Source connections

Explore related subjects

scientific communication and educationPreprint

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ray, T., Limon, M. S. H., Tuhin, M. S. H., Sharmin, A.. 2020-07-27. Indigenous knowledge of plant uses by the community of Batiaghata, Khulna, Bangladesh. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.22.216689

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

bioRxiv2026

Evaluating Large Language Models as Tools to Navigate Researchers in Rapidly Evolving Research Landscapes: A Case Study in Cancer Drug Response Prediction

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising tools for assisting researchers in automating and accelerating the synthesis of literature reviews. However, their reliability is a significant concern due to issues like factual inaccuracies and hallucinations. The key question is whether LLMs can reliably provide comprehensive, up-to-date overviews and analyses. This study evaluates the performance of three leading LLMs (OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and DeepSeek) on the complex task of generating a comprehensive survey paper on deep learning for cancer Drug Response Prediction (DRP). By testing both standard and Deep Research (DR) / Deep Think (DT) modes of LLMs with prompts of varying detail, this paper assesses key academic dimensions, including reference management, content quality, and analytical depth. Key findings reveal that while DR modes of LLMs significantly improve reliability by eliminating hallucinations, performance variations exist across models and prompts. A trade-off between reference quantity and integration quality was observed, and even the best-performing models lacked the analytical depth of human experts, often requiring extensive human supervision. The study concludes that LLMs currently serve as powerful assistive tools but still cannot replace the critical validation and synthesis provided by human researchers. Choosing the best LLM to use depends on the task in hand, while several strategies can be implemented to improve the produced output.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2021

The Need for Sustainable Leadership in Academia - a German Case Study

Academic leaders are selected based on their publication record, citation index and acquisition of third party funding. However, heading a successful research team, also requires leadership skills. Despite the clear need, leadership development has been systematically neglected in the present academic system. At the same time, growing evidence suggests that leadership styles of academic supervisors can dramatically affect the mental health of academic employees as well as drive highly skilled researchers out of academia. Here, we assessed the current state of academic leadership in the German academic system by surveying 368 participants currently employed in academia in Germany. We report that 64% of current academic leaders did not feel prepared for their current position while 86% of participants expressed their interest in leadership development programs offered by their research institutions. Our results highlight the demand for leadership development programs in German academic institutions to ensure a more efficient academic system.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2021

Gender and geographical disparity in editorial boards of journals in psychology and neuroscience

While certain metrics of diversity have seen great improvement in recent years in academic psychology and neuroscience, unequal representation remains for many positions of power. Here, we reviewed publicly available information in order to infer the proportion of editors by gender and their country of affiliation in the top 50 journals worldwide in each of the two fields. The sample included a total of 2,864 editors for psychology journals and 3,093 editors for neuroscience journals. There was a statistically significant difference in the proportion of male and female editors in both fields, both across editorial roles, and within various role categories, including editor-in-chief and their deputies at neuroscience journals, associate and section editors in both fields, and editorial and advisory board members in both fields. The only category in which there was not a significant imbalance of male and female scholars was the editors-in-chief of psychology journals and their deputies. Geographically, USA-based academics significantly outnumbered those from other countries as editors in both psychology and neuroscience. Results also indicated that over three quarters of psychology journals (76%) were comprised of more than 50% male editors, while only 20% had a similar proportion of female editors. In neuroscience, 88% of journals were comprised of more than 50% male editors, while only 10% of journals included a similar, proportional majority of female editors. Findings suggest that editorial positions in academic journals, possibly one of the most powerful decision-making roles in academic psychology and neuroscience, are not balanced in gender or geographical representation.

scientific communication and education↗