Content uploaded by Alpina Begossi
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Alpina Begossi on Jul 21, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
USES AND TABOOS OF TURTLES AND TORTOISES ALONG RIO 1
NEGRO, AMAZON BASIN 2
25th April 2006 3
Body text: 5369 words 4
References cited: 1345 words 5
Tables: 3 6
Figures: 5 7
JUAREZ C. B. PEZZUTI 8
Núcleo de Altos Estudos Amazônicos (NAEA), Universidade Federal do Pará (UFPA) 9
Campus do Guamá, 66075-110, Belém, PA, Brazil 10
Ph. 55 91 3201-7231, E-mail: juca@ufpa.br 11
12
JACKSON PANTOJA LIMA 13
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia (INPA), Programa de Pós-Graduação em 14
Biologia de Água Doce e Pesca Interior, 69011-970, Manaus, AM, Brazil. 15
16
DANIELY FÉLIX DA SILVA 17
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Biologia, 18
20550-170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil 19
20
ALPINA BEGOSSI 21
Fisheries Management and Training Program, PREAC-UNICAMP 22
13025-002, Campinas SP, Brazil 23
24
USES AND TABOOS OF TURTLES AND TORTOISES ALONG RIO NEGRO, 24
AMAZON BASIN 25
26
JUAREZ C.B. PEZZUTI1,2, JACKSON PANTOJA LIMA3, 27
DANIELY FÉLIX DA SILVA1 AND ALPINA BEGOSSI4 28
29
1 Núcleo de Altos Estudos Amazônicos (NAEA), Universidade Federal do Pará (UFPA) 30
Campus do Guamá, CEP 66075-110, Belém, PA, Brazil. 31
FAX 55 91 3201-7231 32
Ph. 55 91 3201-7677 33
E-mail: juca@ufpa.br 34
35
2 Corresponding author 36
37
3 Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia (INPA), Programa de Pós-Graduação em 38
Biologia de Água Doce e Pesca Interior, CEP 69011-970, Manaus, AM, Brazil. 39
40
4 Museu de História Natural, Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), CEP 41
13081-970, Campinas, SP, Brazil. 42
43
44
ABSTRACT. - Chelonians (turtles and tortoises) of the Amazon Basin have constituted a 45
source of food for native populations since pre-columbian times and have continued to be 46
an important product for subsistence and cash income since then. Little is known regarding 47
the current levels of exploitation and pressure on natural stocks, despite observations of 48
declining populations of the most appreciated species. This study investigates the uses of 49
Amazonian chelonians by the riverine people of Negro River, including their consumption, 50
preferences, restrictions, segmentary taboos, harmfulness, medicinal use, and sale. We 51
conducted interviews with fishing families in the city of Barcelos and in Jaú National Park, 52
both located in the Rio Negro basin, in the state of Amazonas, Brazil. All chelonian species 53
are used by the riverine people, especially for consumption. Peltocephalus dumerilianus is 54
caught year round, whereas capture of other species is restricted to the dry season. 55
Terrestrial species are collected whenever found in the forest. Herbivorous species are 56
preferred as food; omnivorous or carnivorous species are subject to food taboos. Two 57
species are largely used in zootherapy, mainly against swelling and hemorrhages. Fat and 58
epidermal scutes (scales) are widely used. At least four species are exploited commercially. 59
60
Key words: ethnobiology, food taboos, chelonians, Amazon, Brazil. 61
62
63
RESUMO. - Os quelônios da bacia amazônica constituem um ítem alimentar desde antes da 64
chegada do colonizador europeu, e um importante produto regional para subsistência e 65
comercialização, desde o período colonial até os dias de hoje. Todavia, muito pouco se sabe 66
a respeito dos níveis de exploração e pressão sobre os estoques naturais, embora o declínio 67
populacional das espécies mais apreciadas seja evidente. Este estudo investiga as formas de 68
uso dos quelônios amazônicos pela população ribeirinha do Rio Negro, incluindo consumo, 69
preferências, restrições, tabus segmentares, periculosidade, uso medicinal e 70
comercialização. Realizamos entrevistas com famílias de pescadores na cidade de Barcelos 71
e no Parque Nacional do Jaú, ambos situados na bacia do Rio Negro, Estado do Amazonas, 72
Brasil. Todas as espécies são utilizadas pelos habitantes, acima de tudo para consumo. Uma 73
delas (Peltocephalus dumerilianus) é capturada durante o ano inteiro, enquanto que outras o 74
são na estação seca. As espécies terrestres são coletadas ocasionalmente quando 75
encontradas na floresta. As espécies herbívoras são as preferidas, sendo que as 76
omnívoras/carnívoras estão sujeitas a tabus. Duas espécies são largamente usadas como 77
zooterápico, principalmente contra inchaços e hemorragias. A gordura e os escudos 78
epidérmicos são predominantemente usados. Pelo menos quatro espécies são 79
comercializadas. 80
81
82
RÉSUMÉ. – Les chéloniens de la bacie amazonique constituent un aliment et un produit de 83
l’économie regional importants même avant l’arrivée du colonizateur européen. On sait très 84
peu sur la pression de la exploitación des ressources naturels, mais il y a des évidences du 85
déclin de la population des espèces plus valorisées. Ce travail étude l’utilization des 86
chéloniens amazoniques par le peuple des plages du fleuve Negro, considerant la 87
consommation, préférences, restrictions, tabous segmentaires, perils, utilization médicinale 88
et commercialization. On a fait des entrevues avec des familles des pecheurs de la ville de 89
Barcelos e dans le Parque National du Jaú, les deux situés dans le bassin du fleuve Negro, 90
état de Amazonas, Brasil. Toutes les espèces sont surtout utilizées par les habitants pour la 91
consommation. Une espèce est capturée pendant tout l’année, d’autres dans la sécheresse 92
et les espèces terrestres sont colectées occasionellement quand elles sont trouvées dans la 93
forêt. Les espèces herbivores sont preferées et les omnivores/carnivores sont sujets a 94
tabous. Deux espèces sont largement utilizées em zoothérapie, surtout por les abcès et 95
hémorragies. La grasse et les écus épidermiques sont les plus utilizés. Au minimum, quatre 96
espèces sont commercializées. 97
98
99
INTRODUCTION 100
The study of food choices and taboos involves emic and etic perspectives (Begossi 101
1997; Begossi et al. 2004). One of the most common distinctions between them was 102
provided by Harris (1976), who defined the emic as the insider’s point of view, and the etic 103
as the view of the outsider or analyst. The emic can be related to the construction of a 104
given culture and includes understanding of the physical environment (Sahlins 1976). An 105
etic perspective is that of the external observer, whose analyses are based on materialistic 106
factors (Harris 1977, 1985). Following Lévi-Strauss (in Harris 1976), “The etics is just the 107
observers’s emics.” The materialist point of view considers mainly the trade-off involving 108
both the process of decision making and the understanding of the adaptive value of food 109
choices. The choices and restrictions are here considered as products of the interaction 110
between productive forces (Ross 1978). 111
These two visions are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, they are complementary, and 112
can allow for a better comprehension of behaviors and of food taboos (Begossi 1997). The 113
emic perspective gives insights into the understanding of the criteria used to establish 114
preferences and restrictions, while the etic perspective permits the linkage of ethnographic 115
information with aspects revealed through ecological, chemical, and toxicological analyses. 116
Food choice is also studied by human ecologists as a product of cultural and ecological 117
evolutionary processes (Ross 1978). 118
Food taboos are also considered to play a key role in human adaptive systems of the 119
neotropics, because protein accquisition is considered by many researchers to be the main 120
factor influencing/limiting human population distributions in Amazonia (Carneiro 1968; 121
Lahtrap 1968). MacDonald (1977), Reichel-Dolmatoff (1976) and Balèe (1985) 122
documented cases in which food taboos are concrete cultural rules reducing hunting 123
pressure upon important game species. Balèe also showed how this behavior improves prey 124
availability near Ka´apor settlements in northeastern Amazonia. Basso (1972, 1973) 125
showed that for the Kalapalo and other Upper Xingu indigenous societies almost all 126
terrestrial game species are considered inedible. 127
Hill et al. (1987) pointed out that maximization of energy or protein acquisition is 128
not enough to explain human foraging behavior. So there are other aspects besides caloric 129
gain that should be included in human foraging models to make them more realistic. 130
Begossi and Richerson (1992) analyzed the acquisition, consumption and sale of fish on 131
Búzios Island, in southeastern Brazil, using Optimal Foraging Theory (OFT). This study 132
showed that food choices not only reflected the maximization of energetic returns, but also 133
take into account variables such as fish boniness, individual preferences, market value, and 134
fish availability, all which were important in determining if a fish species would be 135
consumed or sold. 136
In the Amazon basin aquatic turtles have always constituted an important food item 137
for the local inhabitants. The Giant Amazon River Turtle, Podocnemis expansa (tartaruga), 138
originally one of the most abundant species, was often consumed and also kept in wooden 139
corrals in indian villages, and consumed during the wet season when it was less available 140
(Redford and Robinson 1991). Eggs were, and still are in some places an important source 141
of protein for the local population. Gilmore (1986) suggests that the collection of this turtle 142
species was the most important etnozoological activity in the entire Amazon extending 143
from early inhuman settlement of the basin up to the present. 144
After the arrival of colonists, this subsistence activity was transformed into a typical 145
merchant capitalist production system, where the main product was turtle egg oil, used for 146
frying food, and as fuel for house and street illumination. Turtle meat, however, remained 147
important only for local consumption, supplying only the regional market (Bates 1898; 148
Silva Coutinho 1868). At the beginning of the 20th century, turtle oil was no longer a 149
commercial product, but the consumption of adult animals remained important, constituting 150
a significant food resource for riverine peoples even now, and continues to be of some 151
importance in local markets. Amazon river turtles are still being captured, consumed and 152
sold (Johns 1987; Rebêlo and Lugli 1996; Vogt 2001). 153
The consumption of aquatic turtles in the Negro River Basin can be explained by 154
several factors including: preferences, restrictions, aversions, taboos, medicinal uses and 155
market values (Rebêlo and Pezzuti 2001). The objective of this study is the food choice 156
concerning the different chelonians species available in the Negro river. 157
158
159
STUDY AREA 160
Along the Negro River and its major tributaries, like the Jaú River (Figure 1) the 161
floodplain is innundated by black water (rich in humic acids, responsible for its color, 162
resembling tea) in the rainy season, extending from December to June. The floodplain is 163
composed of a complex system of channels and lakes of all sizes and shapes, which are 164
often difficult to distinguish from the main river channel, especially in the wet season. This 165
complex ecosystem is highly dynamic due to the seasonal variation in the water level. 166
Aquatic fauna are adapted to the annual cycle of rising and falling waters, which provide 167
variation in habitat availability over the course of the year. Of special importance for 168
turtles is the availability in the low water season of suitable sites for nesting and 169
reproduction (such as sandy and muddy beaches, or other dried and open habitats (Ayres 170
1995; Goulding 1990). 171
Created in 1980, Jaú (Figure 1) is the second largest Brazilian National Park 172
(25.350 km2). Inhabited for centuries, human settlements are small and dispersed along 173
margins of the river. The Park shelters at least eight species of aquatic chelonians, three of 174
which are important as food sources (Rebêlo and Lugli 1996). One of the goals of the 175
management plan for Jaú National Park is to involve the resident population in the 176
determination of the biological sustainability of faunal resource use. 177
The city of Barcelos was founded in 1728 as a Carmelite mission, and was also the 178
capital of the state of Amazonas from 1758-1791 and 1798-1803. It is the largest Brazilian 179
municipality in Amazonas State, and its population of 16,107 inhabitants (Prang 2001) 180
descends from different indigenous ethnic groups, Portuguese and, later, northeastern 181
Brazil immigrants involved in rubber extraction (Machado 2001). The local economy is 182
deeply linked to extractive activities such as ornamental fisheries (piabas), subsistence 183
fishing, hunting and fruit collection (especially palm trees). Five species of pelomedusid 184
turtles (Podocnemis expansa, P. unifilis, P. erythrocephala, P. sextuberculata and 185
Peltocephalus dumerilianus) are used for food and trade. Two of them (P. expansa and P. 186
unifilis) are generally bought for resale in the capital Manaus, whereas the other three are 187
locally sold and consumed (Rebêlo and Pezzuti 2001). 188
189
190
METHODOLOGY 191
Fieldwork consisted of 13 trips to Jaú River betweens 2000 and 2002, and three 192
trips to Barcelos in 2001 and 2002. Each trip lasted from one to three weeks during which 193
data was collected on turtle population biology and harvesting. In Jaú, research was 194
conducted in the following family groupings and communities: Boca do Jaú, Carabinani, 195
Ataíde, Seringalzinho, Vista Alegre, Cachoeirinha, Cachoeira, Patauá, Miratucu and 196
Capoeira Grande (32 families). On the Unini River, the northern boundary of the Park, we 197
visited a medium-sized community called Floresta in April 2000, where we interviewed all 198
15 families. In the city of Barcelos, we interviewed individuals from 36 families, from the 199
neighborhood of Nazaré, which is largely inhabited by fishermen and their families and 200
also interviewed fishermen from the neighborhoods of Aparecida, Santo Antônio, São 201
Lázaro, Gruta, and in the municipal market. 202
In each house we usually conducted more than one interview, though on different 203
occasions and with one individual at a time. Our sample included all the fishermen (adult 204
men and children), and their wives if they were married. We also interviewed some women 205
who also fish for turtles. The first step in each interview was to ask about the chelonian 206
species known in the area, without the aid of animal pictures or drawings. Later, we used 207
questionnaires to characterize the different uses and restrictions concerning the species 208
cited during the first interviews (consumed, preferred, rejected, tabooed, ferocious, 209
medicinal and commercial species). Avoided species were defined as general taboos, and 210
those not eaten in specific conditions are considered specific taboos, following the 211
definitions of Basso (1978) and Colding (1998). Species which even ill or convalescent 212
people could eat were considered clean. A total of 61 interviews were conducted in Jaú 213
(including Unini River) and 41 in Barcelos. 214
215
216
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 217
218
Perception of Chelonian Diversity.—Ten vernacular names were mentioned by the 219
informants (Table 1). From the eleven chelonian species belonging to three families already 220
registered in the area, there was no specific mention of the differences within the lalá group 221
(Phrynops raniceps and P. rufipes) and also within the terrestrial jaboti group (Geochelone 222
carbonaria and G. denticulata). 223
When the informants were asked about the existence of "more than a jaboti quality" 224
(a procedure frequently adopted when interviewing experienced fishermen), there was often 225
a reference to an exceptionally large animal (more than 20 kg), known as jaboti-açu, 226
probably corresponding to a huge individual of G. denticulata. 227
Of all species, the only one whose presence is not registered for the Jaú National 228
Park is the peito-de-mola. Some typical features of this species, such as the presence of a 229
kinesis (articulation between chest and abdominal shell bones) in the plastron, were quite 230
well described by the interviewees (peito-de-mola means "chest-of-spring"). Their 231
description fits well with the one of the mud turtles, Kinosternon scorpioides (Criptodira, 232
Kinosternidae), so we believe that the species is actually found in the Upper Jaú, where 233
rubber-tappers saw it many years ago. In Barcelos, K. scorpioides is not known even by 234
experienced fishermen. The only interviewee that mentioned observing this species is a 235
fisherman from the Solimões River, who saw the animal in that area. In addition, Fachin-236
Terán (1999) captured an individual of K. scorpioides at Mamirauá (Amazonas State) in 237
1997. This difference among respondents’ answers on the occurrence of a small species of 238
aquatic turtle whose distribution is not known in the area demonstrates a deep and detailed 239
knowledge of the environment by some fishermen. Indeed, the species can be considered 240
rare in central Amazon, with only sparse reports of observation (Pritchard 1984). This 241
species is commonly found in the estuarine habitats near the mouth of the Amazon River, 242
where it is locally known as muçuã (in Pará State) or jurará (in Maranhão State). 243
Podocnemis sextuberculata (iaçá) is abundant in white water rivers, including some 244
tributaries of the Negro River, like the Branco, the Demene and the Padauiri Rivers. Today 245
it is the species most frequently captured, consumed and sold of all species in Amazonian 246
white water systems (Johns 1987). It is also abundant on the lower Negro. The small 247
chelonian perema (Platemys platicephala) occurs in small ponds in the lowland forests, 248
usually near the small streams. It is often found when collecting plants or hunting in the 249
forest, and mostly kept as a pet. 250
251
Consumption, Preference and Trade.—All the chelonian species mentioned are used for 252
food, except the peito-de-mola. The Iaçá is consumed only in the lower Negro region, 253
downstream from the mouth of Branco River, the largest white water tributary. They are 254
also preferred as food and are sold in local markets. The cabeçudo (Peltocephalus 255
dumerilianus) is by far the most important species, and is the only species consumed as 256
frequently in the dry as in the rainy season (Figure 2). In spite of its small size, the irapuca 257
(Podocnemis erythrocephala) are important for local consumption and sale, and fishermen 258
tending to concentrate on the larger females and during periods of low water. The tartaruga 259
and the tracajá (Podocnemis unifilis) are also appreciated, due to the higher market values 260
of this species. However, their consumption is low and restricted to the dry season. 261
Results clearly indicate, therefore, that, with the exception of the cabeçudo, 262
chelonians constitute a seasonally available resource. The perema and the peito-de-mola are 263
rarely found and rarely consumed. The species mentioned as favorites were cabeçudo, 264
irapuca, tracajá and tartaruga. Jabotis are appreciated and easily sold, but they were not 265
frequently mentioned for consumption (Figure 2). One plausible explanation is that they are 266
solitary terrestrial animals and only captured when found in the forest. Game mammals are 267
more important than turtles and tortoises in the Jaú inhabitant´s diet, and the consumption 268
of jaboti is rare (Pezzuti et al. 2004). 269
Adult females of small species are also sold by Jaú River inhabitants, usually to 270
residents of communities outside Jaú National Park near the mouth of the river. There is a 271
reasonable explanation for this: within pelomedusids there is an accentuated size 272
dimorphism, the female being larger (Pritchard and Trebbau 1984). Furthermore, the meat 273
is considered softer and, in the case of breeding ovigerous females, eggs are equally 274
consumed. The only exception is the cabeçudo, in which males tend to be larger. Despite 275
being the second largest aquatic turtle species in the whole Amazon Basin, its market value 276
is always lower than that of the tracajá, because it is considered dangerous and aggressive 277
("it is a ferocious animal") and feeds on dead animals. However, the cabeçudo is the 278
favorite species, and the most consumed and sold. This preference, however, is restricted to 279
small communities and families located in the Negro margins, and differs from that of 280
larger cities like Manaus and the great consuming market of chelonians in the State of 281
Amazonas, where tracajás and tartarugas are preferred (Rebêlo and Pezzuti 2001). 282
The values reached by the marketed species are shown in Table 2. Some inhabitants 283
of Jaú mentioned that small boats (locally called batelões) that travel upstream selling 284
urban goods to local inhabitants, and buying local products such as cassava flour, lianas, 285
Brazil nut, banana, copaíba, salted pirarucu (Araipama gigas, Osteoglossidae), salted game 286
meat and living chelonians, purchased for half the price paid in Novo Airão, a small city 287
located between the Jaú River and Manaus (Figure 1). The highest profits are obtained by 288
those who ship turtles downstream to Manaus (Rebêlo & Lugli 1995). 289
On the Negro, large ferries (recreios) operate on a larger scale, illegally carrying 290
hundreds of animals to Manaus for resale. Fishermen from Barcelos and other small cities 291
and communities sell tartarugas and tracajás to the ferry operators. For example, a large 292
adult tartaruga, weighing 50 kg or more, can be purchased from a fisherman for a 293
maximum of US$40, and resold in Manaus for up to US$200. The Brazilian authority 294
responsible for suppressing the illegal trade in chelonians, the Instituto Brasileiro de Meio 295
Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis (IBAMA), periodically makes large 296
seizures, and levies large fines on ferryboat owners for each animal found on board (about 297
U$ 200). These measures, however, do not have a significant impact on the illegal trade of 298
chelonians on Negro River or along the other major Amazon tributaries (Rebêlo and 299
Pezzuti 2001; Vogt 2001). 300
301
Avoided, tabooed and medicinal species.—None of the chelonian species mentioned in the 302
interviews was totally free from dietary restrictions or taboos (Figure 3). Chelonian meat is 303
considered, in a general way, heavy, strong, and regionally denominated reimosa, a local 304
term for any food considered potentially harmful, or that must be avoided during illness, 305
puerperium, or menstruation (Moran 1981; Smith 1981), and is therefore subject to 306
restrictions. On the other hand, chelonian meat is much appreciated by fishermen, and no 307
informant denied consuming chelonians. The irapuca (Podocnemis erythrocephala) is the 308
only species considered by most informants to be completely safe (without any dangerous 309
component). 310
The meat of the lalá (Phrynops raniceps), is considered highly "offensive" and 311
reimosa, and capable of causing allergic reactions, a fact that is sharply noticed ("it causes 312
allergy in us and itchiness over the whole body and in the throat, and a red swollen patch on 313
the neck"). The matámatá (Chelus fimbriatus) is considered "ugly," “horrible," and 314
disgusting, and is rejected as food (Table 3). Restrictions on the consumption of this species 315
seem mainly to be related to the fact that it is considered visually repugnant. Some 316
inhabitants state an aversion just to seeing the animal. ("it is ugly, causes fear, its head and 317
neck seem like a snake;” Table 3). Those reactions to the matamatá and lalá suggest the 318
existence of a different cultural aspect in the restriction on these species. Maybe it is a way 319
of reinforcing a food taboo, so as to avoid temptations, as already suggested in the literature 320
by Harris (1977). Food taboos differ in their "incidence of horror" (Turton 1978), which 321
reflects the intensity of the aversion felt by a member of a given culture when violation of a 322
food restriction is mentioned. 323
The cabeçudo, besides being the preferred and the most consumed turtle, also has 324
the most taboos (Figure 2). Restrictions are mainly for the sick or wounded, and for women 325
during puerperium and menstruation. It was also evident that the interviewees considered 326
the male of the more dangerous species, "offensive" and reimosos. Twenty percent 327
mentioned the females of irapuca, cabeçudo and tracajá as not reimosas, and 30% said that 328
no chelonians should be consumed by people who are sick, injured or in the case of women 329
during puerperium and menstruation cited above (n=101). 330
In the Amazon, food taboos are apparently cultural responses to defined illnesses. 331
Segmentary food restrictions (denominated resguardos) are well defined for specific 332
situations, such as menstruation, puerperium, diseases, and wounds. Organisms with these 333
kinds of restrictions are referred to as reimoso (Begossi and Braga 1992; Begossi et al. 334
2004; Morán 1974). The term reimoso covers a series of attributes such as strong and fatty 335
meat, capable of causing inflammation in sick or injured people. Morán (1974) and Smith 336
(1983) observed among riverine amazonian populations the existence of taboos for food 337
considered to be reimoso during illness, injuries, burns, pregnancy, nursing and 338
menstruation. The general reima concept, in its emic sense, was studied by Maués and 339
Motta-Maués (1977). The inhabitants of the Jaú National Park define reimosa as any food 340
that could be "offensive" for one that eats it (Table 3). 341
Colding and Folke (1997) argue for the ecological importance of some taboos, 342
suggesting that many of them affect and sometimes directly manage several components of 343
the local natural environment. Social restrictions, such as taboos, provide protection for 344
ecological communities, habitat patches, and populations of endangered species. The 345
authors analyzed the role of taboos in protecting species listed as threatened by the World 346
Conservation Union (IUCN 2001) and also for endemic and keystone species (species 347
playing a fundamental role in the structure, dynamics and stability of an ecosystem). About 348
30% of the taboos identified forbid any use of the species listed. These analyses suggest 349
that several specific taboos have the ability to protect threatened species, and that this 350
protection may be effective. This protection, though not intentional, may be significant in 351
ecological terms. Anthropological studies have shown the existence of complex ecological 352
adaptations behind taboos (Begossi 1997; Harris 1979, 1985; Rappaport 1971). In a study 353
of the effects of the alimentary taboos in hunting, McDonald (1977) verified that food 354
taboos have an impact on animal populations, and all indications are that the impact is one 355
of conservation. Food taboos can significantly reduce the intensity of resource utilization, 356
and are more frequent and stronger among tropical forest human groups and large animals, 357
the groups which are among those most in need of conservation (Colding and Folke 1997). 358
Ballé (1985) observed ritual hunting involving the tortoise among the Ka´apor 359
indians of northern Brazil. Menstruating Ka´apor women, pubescente girls and parents of 360
newborns cannot eat meat of any kind excepting from the tortoise G. denticulata. As a 361
consequence, the impact of hunting pressure on the main game species near Ka´apor 362
settlements is restricted, and productivity is unusually high. 363
Jaboti, matamatá and tartaruga are considered medicinal species. The jaboti was 364
mentioned as having medicinal uses by more than 70% of interviewees. Interviewees 365
mentioned especially the use of fat and epidermal carapace scutes for medicinal purposes 366
(Figure 3). In one house we found a small amount of jaboti oil (fat), stored in a small flask. 367
It is used for rheumatism, swellings, toothache and other inflammations, hematomas and 368
hemorrhages. Indeed, hemorrhage and swelling were the most mentioned illnesses which 369
could be healed using chelonian tissues on zootherapic procedures (Figure 4). 370
There are some studies concerning the use of chelonians for medicinal purposes in 371
Brazil. Marques (1995) observed the use of Phrynops tuberculatus carapaces in the lower 372
São Francisco River, Alagoas, Brazil, as a zootherapic used against vascular leakage. In 373
Bahia, a powder obtained from the toasted skull of Phrynops geoffroanus is used in the 374
preparation of a tea recomended in cases of vascular leakage. The fried fat is drunk in very 375
small amounts against rheumatism and is applied on the affected place in cases of bruises 376
and skin diseases (Costa-Neto and Marques 2000). Marine turtles are also considered of 377
high zootherapeutic importance along the Brazilian Atlantic coast (Costa-Neto and 378
Marques 2000). The fat is the main body tissue used from most of the animals mentioned 379
on Ilha Grande (Seixas and Begossi 2001) and on Búzios Island (Begossi 1992). It is 380
usually used for respiratory diseases, thorns in the skin, injuries and rheumatism. The use of 381
animals as medicine could be related to the ease with which useful parts of the animal can 382
be stored for long periods. Fat is easily extracted and conserved on at daytime temperatures. 383
The fat and the epidermal scutes were by far the most frequently mentioned tissues in Jaú 384
and in Barcelos (Figure 3). 385
Moll and Moll (2004) pointed out that freshwater turtles and their eggs are 386
frequently eaten worldwide, with the exception of those cultures in which taboos impose 387
dietary restrictions. Marine turtles are also used as medicine, and avoided as a food item, by 388
coastal fishing communities of southeastern São Paulo, Brazil (Begossi et al. 2004), and are 389
highly valued as a zootherapic in the northeastern State of Bahia (Costa-Neto e Marques, 390
2000). 391
All marine turtle species are hunted for their meat, eggs (collected on the nesting 392
beaches), leather, oil, cartilage and shell (Carrillo et al. 1999; Cornelius et al. 1991; Frazier 393
1980; Lagueux 1991; Nietschmann 1972; Parsons 1964). Nevertheless, coelenterates and 394
tunicates are consumed by all marine turtles, but specially Eretmochelys imbricata and 395
Dermochelys coreacea. These two species are the most avoided by fishermen (Pritchard 396
and Trebbau 1984). Pritchard and Trebbau (1984) suggested that the diet of E. imbricata 397
makes its flesh almost unpalatable. Indeed, many cases of fatal poisoning after the ingestion 398
of its meat have been registered (Bhaskar 1981; Silas and Bastian 1984). Nevertheless, it is 399
regularly eaten in Suriname and in the Caribbean Islands (Pritchard and Trebbau 1984; 400
Carrillo et al. 1999). In the Indian Ocean, the meat of Chelonia mydas, an herbivorous 401
species, is especially favored and while D. coriacea is rarely eaten. E. imbricata is regarded 402
as poisonous in many places, but still widely consumed in the region (Frazier 1980), as well 403
as in the Atlantic (Carrillo et al. 1999). 404
The adaptive value and usefulness of food restrictions, or taboos, have also been 405
studied. For example, several tabooed species are used as medicines. Begossi and Braga 406
(1992) found a significant correlation between species subject to restrictions and those used 407
for medicine in fishing communities of the Tocantins River. Begossi (1992) observed that 408
the most important medicinal species on Buzios Island, the lizard Tupinambis merianae, 409
was systematically avoided as a food. In this case, the taboo can mean protection and may 410
be a way to assure the specie’s availability for future medicinal needs. At Jaú, we observed 411
in many houses the maintenance of live jabotis in small fences. An animal of medium size 412
(about 7 kg) can furnish a reasonable quantity of oil, which is easily kept in a small flask or 413
empty medicine bottle. The oil is easily obtained and widely used. Thus, there is no need to 414
avoid consumption of this species to guarantee availability for future use as a medicine. 415
Nevertheless, its meat is considered reimosa, heavy and offensive, and there is a specific 416
taboo against consumption in several situations (puerperium, menstruation, diseases, 417
wounds, inflammations). Therefore, other factors should be investigated to better 418
understand this food taboo. The Matamatá was also frequently mentioned as source of 419
homemade medicine (Figure 2). The most common use is in the preparation of tea made 420
from the skin, which is used against many diseases (Table 4). Unlike the jabotis, this 421
species is not usually consumed, offering additional support for Begossi’s “drugstore” 422
hypothesis (Begossi 1992). 423
We can distinguish a reasonably well-defined pattern, in which the Pelomedusids 424
are widely accepted for food and trade, and the Chelids are tabooed and used for making of 425
homemade medicines. Chelids, generally, tend to have a carnivorous diet, whereas the 426
Pelomedusids are essentially herbivorous (Fachin et al. 1995; Pritchard and Trebbau 1984). 427
An exception occurs only with the tabooed cabeçudo, which is omnivorous (Perez-Emán 428
and Paolillo 1997) and considered by the inhabitants to be reimoso because it feeds on any 429
type of meat (Table 4). Nevertheless, it is the most consumed species in Jaú (Rebêlo and 430
Lugli 1995) and Barcelos (Vogt 2001), and is captured mainly through fish baits. It was 431
also the only chelonian species considered to be dangerous, and was mentioned by 86.5% 432
of the interviewees as being a ferocious animal. Male individuals of the other species are 433
also capable of inflicting painful bites on the incautious or distracted fisherman. Our 434
interviewees also mentioned that adult female tartarugas and adult lalás can cause serious 435
injuries. Begossi (1992), studying food taboos among fishing communities of the 436
southeastern coast of Brazil, verified that the reasons given by the interviewees for not 437
eating certain fish were the shape, appearance, bad smell, aggressive behavior, conspicuous 438
teeth, absence of scales, strong or "loaded" meat (reimosa), habit of eating mud and 439
presence of blood. 440
Most of the avoided species are carnivorous, especially piscivorous. Begossi et al. 441
(2004) demonstrated for Amazonian and Atlantic Forest fishes that food taboos were 442
related specially to piscivorous fish. Secondary consumers, especially piscivorous fish, are 443
frequently avoided as food, and primary consumers tend to be recommended during 444
illnesses. The probability of acquiring toxins increases with the trophic level of the species 445
that is being consumed, as toxins accumulate in the higher levels (Begossi 1992, Begossi 446
and Braga 1992, Begossi et al. 2004). Ciguatera is a widespread example of poisoning 447
caused by the ingestion of fish with ciguatoxin, which fish acquire by feeding on a toxic 448
dinoflagellate (Lewis 1984). From this perspective, avoiding carnivorous fish can be 449
considered to be adaptive. Our results tend to confirm this hypothesis, as we observed 450
widespread acceptance of the herbivorous Pelomedusids and strong restrictions on 451
consuming the carnivorous Chelids. 452
Colding and Folke (2000) proposed that taboos, as local informal institutions, could 453
be used as a management tools for conservation, but official recognition is essential. 454
Examples of restrictions on the consumption of species that can affect human health, as 455
observed in the Atlantic rainforest and in the Amazon, could be faced as automatic 456
sanctions, in which violation results in penalties. Colding e Folke enumerate, however, 457
some crucial elements to make the system successful: previous experience in community 458
organization, existence of specific legal instruments and the decentralization of government 459
authority to local users. 460
461
CONCLUSIONS 462
All chelonian species are exploited by the riverine peoples studied, mostly for 463
consumption, with the exception of the smaller species restricted to small aquatic habitats 464
in the lowland forest, such as ponds and streams. Outstanding aspects of human use of 465
chelonians are: the year round consumption of the cabeçudo and of the irapuca during dry 466
the season; the consumption of iaçá in Negro River communities near the Mouth of Jaú 467
River; an aversion to the consumption of matamatá and lalá, the latter being avoided 468
because it is said to induce allergic reactions; the medicinal use of jaboti fat and matamatá 469
epidermic scutes; the commercial exploitation of cabeçudos and tracajás; and the 470
avoidance of carnivorous species. 471
472
473
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 474
Field work was supported by World Wild Life Fund – WWF (project code CSR-143), 475
Vitória Amazônica Foundation (FVA), Brazilian agency CNPq (Programa do Trópico 476
Úmido – PTU), Amazonas Federal University (UFAM), FAPESP (project number 477
98/16160-5) and State University of Campinas (UNICAMP, CCPG Ecologia). Fernando 478
Oliveira, Alexandre Kemenes, Marcel Corrêa Ribeiro, Patricia Prado, Viviane Laime, 479
Karina Amaral and George Rebêlo helped in the fieldwork. We are grateful to logistic 480
support from FVA and IBAMA (Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos 481
Naturais Renováveis) during the entire fieldwork. Maria do Carmo Brito helped on the 482
French abstract, Glaucia Montoro helped on the study site map and George Rebêlo read and 483
criticized the project and manuscript. The manuscript was redrafted after reviews by Janet 484
Chernela and two anonymous reviewers. David McGrath reviewed final grammar and 485
spelling. AB thanks CNPq for a research productivity scholarship. We thank to all 486
interviewees and their families. 487
488
489
REFERENCES CITED 490
Ayres, José.M. 1995. As matas de várzea do Mamirauá. Sociedade Civil Mamirauá, MCT-491
CNPq, Belém. 492
Basso, Ellen. 1978. Comments [on Eric Ross’s Food Taboos, diet and hunting strategy]. 493
Current Anthropology 19(1):16-77. 494
Balée, William. (1985). Ka’apor Ritual Hunting. Human Ecology 485:485-510. 495
Bates, Henry. W. 1892. The naturalist on the river Amazon. London, Murray. 496
Begossi, Alpina. 1992. Food Taboos at Búzios Island (Brazil): their significance and 497
relation to folk medicine. Journal of Ethnobiology 12(1):117-139. 498
Begossi, Alpina. 1993. Ecologia Humana: um enfoque das relações homem-ambiente. 499
Interciência 18(3):121-132. 500
Begossi, Alpina. 1997. Food taboos: a scientific reason? In: Plants for Food and Medicine, 501
eds. N.L. Etkin, D. R. Harris, P. J. Houghton and H. D. V. Prendergast, pp. 1-6. 502
Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. 503
Begossi, Alpina and Francisco M. S. Braga. 1992. Food taboos and folk medicine among 504
fishermen from the Tocantins River (Brazil). Amazoniana 12(1):101-118. 505
Begossi, Alpina, and Richerson, Peter. J. 1992. The animal diet of families from Búzios 506
Island (Brazil): an optimal foraging approach. Journal of Human Ecology 3(2):433-507
458. 508
Begossi, Alpina, Hanazaki, Natalia. and Rossano Ramos. 2004. Food chain and the reasons 509
for fish food taboos among Amazonian and Atlantic Forest fishers (Brazil). 510
Ecological Applications 14(5):1334-1343. 511
Bhaskar, Satish. 1981. Turtle meat kills three. Hamadryad 6(1):8-10. 512
Carrillo, Elvira; Grahame.J.W. Webb and Charlie Manolis. 1999. Hawksbill Turtles 513
(Eretmochelys imbricata) in Cuba: An Assessment of the Historical Harvest and its 514
Impacts. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 3(2):264-280. 515
Colding, Johan and Carl Folke. 1997. The relations among threatened species, their 516
protection, and taboos. Conservation Ecology 1(1):1-19. 517
Colding, Johan and Carl Folke. 1998. Analysis of hunting options by the use of general 518
food taboos. Ecological Modelling 110:5-17. 519
Colding, Johan and Carl Folke. 2000. The Taboo System: Lessons About Informal 520
Institutions for Nature Management. Georgetown International Environmental Law 521
Review 12:413-445. 522
Cornelius, Stephen E.; Mario Alvarado Ulloa; Juan Carlos Castro; Mercedes Mata del Valle 523
and Douglas C. Robinson. 1991. Management of Olive Ridley Sea Turtles 524
(Lepidochelys olivacea) Nesting at playas Nancite and Ostional, Costa Rica. In: 525
Neotropical Wildilife Use and Conservation, eds. John G. Robinson and Kent H. 526
Redford, pp. 111-135. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 527
Costa-Neto, Eraldo and José G. Marques. 2000. Faunistic resources used as medicines by 528
artisanal fishermen from Siribinha Beach, State of Bahia, Brazil. Journal of 529
Ethnobiology 20(1):93-109. 530
Fachin-Terán, Augusto, Richard C. Vogt and Maria De F.S. Gomez. 1996. Food habits of 531
an assemblage of five turtles in the Rio Guaporé, Rondônia, Brasil. Journal of 532
Herpetology 29(4):536-547. 533
Fachin-Terán, Augusto. 1999. Ecologia de Podocnemis sextuberculata (Testudines, 534
Pelomedusidae), na Reserva de Desenvolvimento Sustentável Mamirauá, 535
Amazonas, Brasil. D.Sc. Thesis (Ecology), Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da 536
Amazônia/Universidade Federal do Amazonas, Manaus. 537
Ferreira, Leandro V. 1997. Effects of the duration of flooding on species richness and 538
floristic composition in three hectares in the Jaú National Park in floodplain forests 539
in central Amazonia. Biodiversity and Conservation 6:1353-1363. 540
Frazier, Jack. 1980. Exploitation of marine turtles in the Indian Ocean. Human ecology 541
8(4):329-369. 542
Gilmore, Raymond M. 1986. Fauna e Etnozoologia da América do Sul Tropical. In: Suma 543
Etnológica Brasileira, ed. Darcy Ribeiro, pp. 189-233. Up to data edition of 544
Handbook of South American Indians (1963), by Cooper Square Publ. Inc., New 545
York. 546
Goulding, Michael. 1990. Amazon: the flooded forest. Sterling Publishing, New York. 547
Harris, Marvin. 1976. History and Significance of the Emic/Etic Distinction. Annual 548
Review of Anthropology 5:329-340. 549
Harris, Marvin. 1977. Cannibals and Kings: The origin of cultures. Vintage Books, New 550
York. 551
Harris, Marvin. 1985. Good to eat: Riddles of food and culture. Simon & Schuster, New 552
York. 553
Headland, Thomas, N. 1990. Introduction: a dialogue between Kennet Pike and Marvin 554
Harris on emics and etics. In: Emics and etics, the insider outsider debate, eds. 555
Thomas. N. Headland, Kennet. L. Pike, Marvin Harris, pp. 13-27. Frontiers of 556
Anthropology, volume 7, Sage Publications, Newbury Park. 557
Hill, Kim., Hillard Kaplan, Kristen Hawkes and Ana M. Hurtado. 1987. Foraging decisions 558
among Ache hunter-gatherers: new data and implications for optimal foraging 559
models. Ethnology and Sociobiology 8:8-36. 560
IUCN 2001. Threatened animals of the world. Available at: 561
http://www.wcmc.org.uk/species/animals/animal_redlist.html (verified 25 April 562
2006). 563
Johns, Andrew. 1987. Continuing problems for amazonian river turtles. Oryx 21(1):25-28. 564
Lagueux, Cynthia. J. 1991. Economic Analysys of Sea Turtle Eggs in a Coastal Community 565
on the Pacific Coas of Honduras. In: Neotropical Wildilife Use and Conservation, 566
eds. John G. Robinson and Kent H. Redford, pp. 136-144. University of Chicago 567
Press, Chicago. 568
Lewis, Nancy D. 1984. Ciguatera-parameters of a tropical health problem. Human Ecology 569
12:253-274. 570
Nietschmann, Bernard. 1972. Hunting and fishing focus among the Miskito Indians, 571
Eastern Nicaragua. Human Ecology, 8(1):41-67. 572
Machado, Ruy. 2001. Life and Culture on the Rio Negro. In: Conservation and 573
Management of Ornamental Fish Resources of the Rio Negro Basin, ed. Labish N. 574
Chao, pp. 245-265. Amazonas Brazil – Project Piaba. EDUA, Manaus – AM. 575
McDonald, David R. 1977. Food Taboos: A Primitive Environmental Protection Agency 576
(South America). Anthropos 72:734-748. 577
Marques, José. G. 1995. Pescando pescadores. NUPAUB-USP, São Paulo. 578
Maués, Raymundo Heraldo and Maria Angelica Motta-Maués. 1977. O modelo da "reima": 579
representações alimentares em uma comunidade amazônica. Anuário Antropológico 580
77:120-147. 581
Moll, Don and Edward O. Moll. 2004. The ecology, exploitation and conservation of river 582
turtles. Oxford University Press, New York. 583
Morán, Emílio F. 1974. The Adaptive System of the Amazonian Caboclo. In: Man in the 584
Amazon, ed. Charles Wagley, pp. 136-159. University of Florida Press, Gainesville. 585
Morán, Emílio F. 1981. Developing the Amazon. Indiana University Press, Bloomington. 586
Parsons, James J. 1964. The Green turtle and man. Journal of Animal Ecology 33(1):213-587
214. 588
Perez-Emán, Jorge and Alfredo Paolillo. 1997. Diet of the Pelomedusid Turtle 589
Peltocephalus dumerilianus in the Venezuelan Amazon. Journal of Herpetology 590
31(2):173-179. 591
Pezzuti, Juarez.C.B.; Jackson P. Lima; Daniely Félix-Silva and GeorgeH. Rebêlo. 2004. A 592
caça e a pesca no Parque Nacional do Jaú, Amazonas. In: Janelas para a 593
Biodiversidade no Parque Nacional do Jaú, edsw. S.H. Borges, S. Iwanaga., C.C. 594
Durigan and M.R. Pinheiro, pp. 213-230. Fundação Vitória amazônica, Manaus. 595
Prang, Gregory. 2001. Aviamento and the Ornamental Fishery of the Rio Negro, Brazil: 596
Implications for sustainable resource use. In: Conservation and Management of 597
Ornamental Fish Resources of the Rio Negro Basin, ed. Labish N. Chao, pp. 43-73. 598
Amazonas Brazil – Project Piaba. EDUA, Manaus. 599
Pritchard, Peter.C.H. and Pedro Trebbau. 1984. The Turtles of Venezuela. New York, 600
Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. 601
Rappaport, Roy. A. 1971. The Sacred in Human Evolution. Annual Review of Ecology and 602
Systematics 2:23-44. 603
Rea, Amadeo. M. 1981. Resource utilization and taboos of Sonoran desert peoples. Journal 604
of Ethnobiology 1(1):69-83. 605
Rebêlo, George. H. and Luciana Lugli, 1996. The Conservation of Freshwater Turtles and 606
the Dwellers of the Amazonian Jaú National Park. In: Ethnobiology in Human 607
Welfare. ed. Sudhanshu Kumar Jain, pp. 253-358. Deep Publications, New Delhi. 608
Rebêlo, George H. and Juarez C.B. Pezzuti. 2001. Percepções sobre o consumo de 609
quelônios na Amazônia: considerações para o manejo atual. Ambiente e Sociedade 610
6/7:85-104. 611
Redford, Kent H. and John Robinson. 1991. Neotropical Wildlife Use and Conservation. 612
University of Chicago Press, Ltd., London. 613
Reichel-Dolmatoff, Gerardo. 1976. Cosmology as an ecological analysys: a view from the 614
rainforest. Man 11:307-318. 615
Ross, Eric B. 1978. Food Taboos, Diet and Hunting Strategy: The Adaptation to Animals in 616
Amazon Cultural Ecology. Current Anthropology 19(1):1-36. 617
Sahlins, Marshall. 1976. Culture and practical reason. University of Chicago Press, 618
Chicago. 619
Seixas, Cristiana S. and Alpina Begossi. 2001. Ethnozoology of fishing communities from 620
Ilha Grande (Atlantic forest coast, Brazil). Journal of Ethnobiology 21(1):107-135. 621
Silas, E.G. and A.Fernando Bastian. 1984. Turtle poisoning. Sea Turtle Research and 622
Conservation. Central Marine Fisheries and Research Institute Bulletin 35:62-75. 623
Silva Coutinho, José. M. 1868. Sur les tortues de L’Amazone. Bulletin the la Société 624
Zoologique d’Aclimatation, 2 série, Tome V, Paris. 625
Smith, Eric A. 1983. Anthropological applications of optimal foraging theory: A critical 626
review. Current Anthropology 24:19- 83. 627
Smith, Nigel J.H. 1981. Man, fishes, and the Amazon. Columbia University Press, New 628
York. 629
Setz, Eleonore. Z.F. 1989. Animals in the Nambiquara Diet: Methods of collection and 630
crocessing. Journal of Ethnobiology 11(1):1-22. 631
Turton, David. 1978. Comments [on Eric Ross’s Food Taboos, diet and hunting strategy]. 632
Current Anthropology 19(1):26-27. 633
Vogt, Richard C. 2001. Turtles of the Rio Negro. In: Conservation and Management of 634
Ornamental Fish Resources of the Rio Negro Basin, ed. Labish N. Chao, pp. 245-635
365. Amazonas Brazil – Project Piaba. EDUA, Manaus.636
Table 1: Chelonians mentioned as known by interviewees from Jaú (N = 61) 637
and Barcelos (N = 41) 638
639
Species Local name Known
in Jaú
(%)
Known in
Barcelos
(%)
Common use
(mentioned by
more than 50%
interviewees)
PELOMEDUSIDAE
Podoenemis unifilis Tracajá 5
7
(93,3) 3
7
(92,5) Food
Podocnemis expansa Tartaruga 5
0
(82) 3
8
(95,0) Food
Podocnemis
erythrocephala
Irapuca 5
4
(88,5) 3
7
(92,5) Food
Podocnemis
sextuberculata
Iaçá 3
6
(59,0) 2
5
(62,5) Food
Peltocephalus
dumerilianus
Cabeçudo 6
1
(100) 4
0
(100) Food
CHELIDAE
Phrynops raniceps
Phrynops rufipes
Lalá 5
0
(82,0) 3
3
(82,5) Tabooed food
Platemys platicephala Perema 4
8
(78,7) 3
1
(77,5)
Chelus fimbriatus Matamatá 5
0
(82) 3
4
(85) Medicine
TESTUDINIDAE
Geochelone
carbonaria
Geochelone
denticulata
Jaboti 5
0
(82) 3
7
(92,5) Food and
medicine
KINOSTERNIDAE
Kinosternon
scorpioides*
Peito-de-
mola
2
0
(36,8) 1 (2,5)
* not yet registered 640
641
Table 2: Prices for chelonian sale at Jaú National Park, Amazonas State, Brazil. 642
643
Species Price in U$$ Dollars
Podocnemis unifilis Females: 6,00
Males: 1,00 to 3,00
Podocnemis expansa Females: 40,00
Males: no information
Podocnemis
erythrocephala
Females: 2,50 to 3,00
Podocnemis
sextuberculata
Females: 1,00
Peltocephalus
dumerilianus
2,00 to 6,00
Geochelone carbonaria No information
Geochelone denticulada No information
Chelus fimbriatus 17,00
644
645
Table 3: Explanations given by the Jaú and Barcelos inhabitants during interviews, to 646
justify the reimoso denomination. 647
648
Local
Name
Place Explanations given by the interviewees
Cabeçudo Jaú " male provokes inflammation "
" male cannot be eaten "
" a lot of people don't like "
" the male cannot eat "
" reimoso, more the males, fear exists. Eggs only cooked,
they cause tumor "
" reimoso, doesn't have bill the bites that I already took "
" reimoso, burns blood, it already took 2 bitten "
" in the protection (of the woman)"
" only eat the female "
" some woman eats, other not "
Barcelos "I believe so, it eats everything, even snakes"
" It is almost all nibbled, has to be well cooked ".
" tartaruga only eats fruit, cabeçudo eats everything ".
" cabeçudo meat burns the blood ".
Iaçá Jaú " it is pitiú (smells like urine)"
Irapuca Jaú " male are not allowed "
Jaboti Jaú " it is the most offensive "
" feeding of the animal "
" male and female are reimosos "
"only tracajá are allowed. Even for children with growing
teeth "
Barcelos " scratches, also the eggs
"for wounded people"
"Jaboti for God sake!"
Lala Jaú "provokes scratch and allergy, my son cannot eat "
"harmful for the stomach "
"It is not allowed to anyone"
"eggs provokes allergy"
"who is allergic cannot eat"
Barcelos "of the same family of the cabeçudo, the same food ".
" My son cannot eat, provokes scratch".
Perema Barcelos " His bite has poison ".
Matamatá Jaú " very horrible, I don't touch nor eat it"
Tartaruga Jaú " males are not allowed"
Tracajá Jaú "females without eggs doesn't do badly"
" the male is reimoso "
Barcelos " The atracajá is the worst ".
" causes scratches, it is bad ".
Males Jaú " males of all types are reimosos "
" The female are not reimosas ".
Barcelos " Male is harmed, but females don't".
All Barcelos " all chelonian is reimoso ".
" Everyone scratches, the animal that scratches is reimoso
".
FIGURE CAPTIONS 649
650
Figure 1: Study sites in Negro River Basin (indicated with gray rectangles). 651
652
Figure 2: Chelonian species mentioned as commonly consumed, preferred and sold by 653
interviewees in Barcelos and Jaú (N = 81 for interviews on consumed species, N = 102 for 654
preferred and sold species). 655
656
Figure 3: Chelonian species mentioned for specific uses by interviewees from Barcelos and 657
Jaú (N = 102 for avoided, tabooed and medicinal species, N = 81 for species allowed for ill 658
people). 659
660
Figure 4: Body parts and tissues obtained from chelonians for medicinal purpose at 661
Barcelos and Jaú, Rio Negro River, Amazonas, Brasil. (N = 62 for Jaú and 46 for 662
Barcelos). 663
664
Figure 5: Diseases, wounds and infections mentioned as to be cured or treated using 665
chelonian tissues by interviewees from Jaú and Barcelos, Negro River basin, Amazonas, 666
Brasil (N = 60 for Jaú and 40 for Barcelos). 667
668
LIST OF TABLES 669
670
Table 1: Chelonians mentioned as known by interviewees from Jaú (N = 61) 671
and Barcelos (N = 41) 672
673
Table 2: Prices for chelonian sale at Jaú National Park, Amazonas State, Brazil. 674
675
Table 3: Explanations given by the Jaú and Barcelos inhabitants during interviews, to 676
justify the reimoso denomination. 677
678
679
680
681
682
