title: Wild plant folk nomenclature of the Mongol herdsmen in the Arhorchin National Nature Reserve, Inner Mongolia, PR China.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Folk names of plants are the root of traditional plant biodiversity knowledge. In pace with social change and economic development, Mongolian knowledge concerning plant diversity is gradually vanishing. Collection and analysis of Mongolian folk names of plants is extremely important. During 2008 to 2012, the authors have been to the Arhorchin National Nature Reserve area 5 times. Fieldwork was done in 13 villages, with 56 local Mongol herdsmen being interviewed. This report documents plant folk names, analyzes the relationship between folk names and scientific names, looks at the structure and special characteristics of folk names, plant use information, and comparative analysis were also improved.
  
  
  METHODS
  Ethnobotanical interviewing methods of free-listing and open-ended questionnaires were used. Ethnobotanical interview and voucher specimen collection were carried out in two ways as local plant specimens were collected beforehand and then used in interviews, and local Mongol herdsmen were invited to the field and interviewed while collecting voucher specimens. Mongolian oral language was used as the working language and findings were originally recorded in Mongolian written language. Scientific names of plants are defined through collection and identification of voucher specimens by the methods of plant taxonomy.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 146 folk names of local plants are recorded. Plant folk names corresponded with 111 species, 1 subspecies, 7 varieties, 1 form, which belong to 42 families and 88 genera. The correspondence between plant folk names and scientific names may be classified as one to one correspondence, two or three to one correspondence, and one to multitude correspondence. The structure of folk names were classified as primary names, secondary names and borrowed names. There were 12 folk names that contain animal names and they have correspondence with 15 species. There are nine folk names that contain usage information and they have correspondence with 10 species in which five species and one variety of plant are still used by the local people. The results of comparative analysis on the Mongol herdsmen in the Arhorchin National Nature Reserve and the Mongolians in the Ejina desert area shows that there are some similarities, as well as many differences whether in language or in the structure.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In the corresponding rate between plant folk names and scientific names yielded a computational correspondence of 82.19%, which can be considered as a high level of consistency between scientific knowledge and traditional knowledge in botanical nomenclature. Primary names have most cultural significance in the plant folk names. Special characteristic of plant folk names were focused on the physical characteristics of animals which were closely related to their traditional animal husbandry and environment. Plant folk names are not only a code to distinguish between different plant species, but also a kind of culture rich in a deep knowledge concerning nature. The results of comparative analysis shows that Mongolian culture in terms of plant nomenclature have characteristics of diversity between the different regions and different tribes.
authors.lastname: Soyolt
authors.lastname: Galsannorbu
authors.lastname: Yongping
authors.lastname: Wunenbayar
authors.forename: Guohou
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Liu
authors.lastname: Khasbagan
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002681:China; D019448:Ethnobotany / Q000145:classification*; D005260:Female; D007722:Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008519:Medicine, Traditional; D008875:Middle Aged; D008986:Mongolia; D008517:Phytotherapy / Q000379:methods*; D010944:Plants / Q000145:classification*; D010946:Plants, Medicinal / Q000145:classification*; D009626:Terminology as Topic