REVIEW Open Access Historical ethnobotanical review of … · 2020. 3. 24. · REVIEW Open Access...

REVIEW Open Access

Historical ethnobotanical review ofmedicinal plants used to treat childrendiseases in Romania (1860s–1970s)Madalina Petran1, Dorin Dragos2,3 and Marilena Gilca1*

Abstract

Background: Romanian ethnopediatrics has a long history of medicinal plant use. The main objective of thepresent review was to identify, collect, systematize, and prioritize the available bibliographical data related tomedicinal plants traditionally used to treat various pediatric diseases in Romania during the 1860s–1970s.

Methods: Information was mainly obtained by manual systematic search in various relevant historical worksfocused on the traditional use of medicinal plants in Romania (1860s–1970s), found in the Archives of RomanianAcademy Library and National Romanian Library.

Results: A total of 153 medicinal plants belonging to 52 families were identified as having ethnopediatricsignificance. The plant traditional indications, targeted body systems, parts used, and way of administration wereprovided. We have also proposed one index (expressed as percentage) in order to assess the ethnopediatricapplicability area of species: ethnopediatric relative therapeutic versatility (ERTV), which was calculated on the basisof the number of distinct uses mentioned for a species. The species identified to have the highest ERTV scoreswere Dryopteris filix-mas (100%), Gratiola officinalis (85.71%), Allium sativum (71.42%), Eryngium planum (71.42%),Juglans regia (71.42%), Matricaria chamomilla (71.42%), Plantago major (71.42%).

Conclusions: The present study exposed for the first time to the international scientific community importantethnopediatric information contained in several local Romanian bibliographical resources that could guide the localand international researchers towards new directions of plant valorization.

Keywords: Medicinal plants, Ethnopharmacology, Pediatry, Ethnopediatry, Children, Romania

IntroductionRomanian ethnomedicine and ethnopediatry in theEuropean context—past and presentThe majority of the European ethnopharmacologicalknowledge has its roots in the Greek and Romancultures, being essentially influenced by works ofDioscorides, Pliny the Elder, Galen, Theophrastus, andHippocrates [1–3]. Scientists revealed a remarkably

consistency between Dioscorides’s De materia medicaand later European pharmacopeia, Dioscoridean trad-ition lasting through the nineteenth century with onlyinsignificant variation [4], or even up to the birth ofmodern pharmacology [2, 3]. While in the Western andCentral Europe, herbalism played an important role indrug discovery beginning with the nineteenth century[5]; in Eastern Europe, the exploitation of the ethnophar-macological tradition was hindered by several challenges:

(a) Vicissitudes related to the social-political-economicenvironment in those countries belonging to the

© The Author(s). 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License,which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you giveappropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate ifchanges were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commonslicence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commonslicence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtainpermission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to thedata made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

* Correspondence: [email protected] of Functional Sciences I- Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine,Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, RomaniaFull list of author information is available at the end of the article

Petran et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine (2020) 16:15 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-020-00364-6

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1186/s13002-020-00364-6&domain=pdfhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/mailto:[email protected]

previous communist bloc, including Romania (e.g.,marginalization of experts originating from bour-geois families, and therefore considered “enemies ofthe regimen,” informational censorship, lack ofinterest in supporting scientific research andpreservation of national cultural heritage, lack offinancial support for libraries—Romanian AcademyLibrary was considered too “bourgeois” by thecommunist regimen, and therefore was replaced in1955 by State Central Library) [6].

(b) Other types of challenges: inaccessibility of many ofthe texts on medicinal plants preserved in locationswith limited access to the public (e.g., monasterieswith a strict daily schedule, archives not open forthe public), reduced legibility of certain manuscripts(lost parts, deterioration in time, low quality ofprint or indecipherable handwriting), some texts arewritten in old languages and are not yet translated(e.g., many Romanian manuscripts found in theNational Archives are written in old Slavoniclanguage) or investigated by an interdisciplinaryteam (historians, linguists, anthropologists,botanists, etc.), old terminology with obscuremeaning for the contemporary scientist, lack ofcertainty about the identity of taxa (e.g., onlyvernacular names or obsolete Latin names),difficulties of communication with informants(e.g., monks who are not allowed to take in face-to-face interviews, suspiciousness of informantscaused by superstitions, or desire of therespondents to protect the “secrets” of theirmedical knowledge, sometimes transmitted onlywithin the families) [4, 7–11].

Some of these aspects might have contributed to thefact that the ethnomedical knowledge of EasternEuropean countries remained in a certain degree local-ized, and isolated from the rest of the world [5, 12]. Onthe other side, due to this isolation and other factors aswell (e.g., slower economical development, preservationof small-scale agro-pastoral activities as main econom-ical subsistence tool in rural area [13], continuity oftraditional practices in monastic communities, knownfor their principles of living in harmony with the envir-onment), this part of Europe may still possess a tremen-dous reservoir of traditional ethnomedical knowledge[13, 14]. For instance, many Romanian ChristianOrthodox monasteries are located in the forests, or far-away from inhabited areas, and cultivate principles simi-lar to those of environmentalist sustainability (e.g.,respect for Creation/Nature as a manifestation of God,protection of natural resources (gifts of Creation) forfuture generations, vegetarianism, stability and discip-line, etc.) [15]. The monastic community from the

Vânători-Neamţ Natural Park, which is recognized asthe second largest in Europe, after that of Mt. Athos inGreece, is such an example [15, 16].It is also known that prior to the twentieth century,

European medicine was based mainly on Mediterraneanplant-derived drugs (with some additions from theMiddle East, Asia, and the Americas) [4], the ethnophar-macological tradition originating in the rest of Europe,such as Eastern European countries including Romania,being underexploited at that time, as well as nowadays.Many scientists claim that exploring historical texts

in a systematic manner may represent a valuablesource of knowledge for the rediscovery of forgottenremedies and the development of modern ethnophar-macology [2, 4, 17, 18].While in some of the Eastern European countries,

such as Poland [19–22], Estonia [12, 23, 24], Bosnia andHerzegovina [25, 26], and Russia [27, 28], the existingethnobotanical resources are already thoroughly studiedor actualized in several ethnobotanical surveys; a differ-ent situation exists in Romania. The content of the avail-able Romanian ethnographic resources is still unknownby the rest of the world as they are not yet published(e.g., manuscripts found in various museums or librar-ies), or published only in the national language (e.g.,“Botanica Poporana Romana” by Simion Florea Marian).These written resources cover mainly the period until demid twentieth century.Romania has a rich ethnomedical and ethnobotanical

heritage. According to various antique texts authored byDioscoride (Codex Constantinopolitanus, De MateriaMedica) and Pseudo Apuleius (De Herbarum Virtuti-bus), many plants (e.g., Thymus vulgaris, Urtica dioica,Achillea millefolium, Mentha piperita) have been usedas remedies on this territory since millennia, and are stillused for similar therapeutic purposes in nowaday ethno-medical practices [29, 30]. Local historical documentsmention the art of healing through herbs practiced byindigenous population beginning with the fourteenthcentury. Several manuscripts originating from variousregions of the present day Romania or interwarRomania, dating from the fourteenth–seventeenth cen-turies, contain elements of medical botany. Some arekept in the Archives of the Library of RomanianAcademy (e.g., manuscripts 740, 498, 573, 312) [8],others are found today outside Romania (e.g., theSlavonic manuscript from Hodros-Bodrog monastery,Banat, Romania, written in the fourteenth or fifteenthcentury, known as Hodoski sbornic or Miscelaneul de laPraga, is found now in Prague) [31]. The sixteenth cen-tury manuscript no.740 in the Romanian AcademyLibrary is considered the oldest text of medical folklorepresently existing in Romania. The initial section is enti-tled “The use of healing plants” and contains 12 pages

Petran et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine (2020) 16:15 Page 2 of 33

with descriptions of indications of several medicinalplants (the section was longer, but some pages were lost)(e.g., small and great plantain, angelica, mint, burdock,gentian, etc.). In order to understand the cultural con-text of our country during the Middle Ages, it should bereminded that the territories of the present day Romanialie within the !!influence area of the Byzantino-Slavicculture; therefore, several of these manuscripts havemixed influences. For instance, despite the fact thatmanuscript no. 740 is written in Ukrainean Slavic lan-guage, it contains influences from Western and CentralEurope (probably Dioscoride’s Materia Medica orMatthiolus’s commentaries to Dioscoride’s work), as wellas elements of local medical folklore [32].More systematic documentation of local traditions of

plant use in Romania, based on field studies, began inthe nineteenth century, with the work of various ethnog-raphers. Simion Florea Marian (1847–1907) initiated thistype of work, and he was followed by Nicolae Leon(1862–1931), Charles Laugier (1875–1930), AlexandruBorza (1887–1971), George Bujorean (1893–1971), ValerButura (1910–1989), and others.The Romanian ethnopharmacological knowledge and

practices were kept alive through oral tradition, withinfamilies of healers, midwives, medicinal plant collectors,and monastic communities in a form almost institution-alized until the XXth century [11, 30].The ethnomedical Romanian practices are also

attested by the lexical background. The manuscript Dic-tiones latinae cum valachica interpretatione by TeodorCorbea, the first encyclopedic lexicographic work cre-ated in the Romanian space, dating around 1701 andpublished only recently [33], contains approximately 400names of plants, including medicinal plants [34]. In1783, the calvinist priest József Benkő (1740–1814) fromTransylvania, published the botanical dictionary “Nom-ina vegetabilium,” which contains 429 species with 612popular Romanian plants names, some also from thearea of !! Muntenia [35]. In other important botanicalwork, Transsilvania Generalis, József Benkő stated that“the Romanian women use efficiently weeds neglectedby others, to cure various diseases” [35].Despite this valuable biocultural heritage, only a few

local teams of researchers focused their attention onRomanian ethnopharmacological practices in the last de-cades [36–41]. The data collected by Romanian scientistsin field studies after 1970s have been reflected in only afew reliable scientific publications [38, 39, 41]. We havealso noticed a recently increasing international interestin traditional uses of medicinal plants on Romanian ter-ritory, especially by ethnic minorities [42–48].Concerning the European ethnopediatry research,

there is a relative scarcity of studies. Moreover, the ma-jority of the available European ethnopharmacological

field studies only contain isolated references to the me-dicinal plant use in children diseases, as they are not ex-clusively focused on traditional ethnopediatry, but ratheron adult ethnomedicine. There are such isolated men-tions on the traditional indications of medicinal plantsin children in various European countries, in cases of di-gestive diseases [26, 49–59], bedwetting [25], respiratorydiseases [55, 60–64], insomnia [52, 63], and growth delay[46, 65]. Nevertheless, more and more scientists try togather and systematize the available world clinical dataon the safety and efficacy of various herbal medicines inchildren [66–71].

Romania—a country with rich biodiversityRomanian flora has unique diversity, being recently esti-mated to 3700 species of higher plants [72], including 57endemic and 171 subendemic species [73]. One of theexplanations of this biodiversity lies in the fact thatRomania is a biological confluence point, located equallydistant from both the North Pole and the Equator andfrom the Atlantic Ocean and the Ural Mountains. Thus,Romania is the most biogeographically diverse countryof the European Union, possessing five of the ten offi-cially recognized geographic regions: alpine, continental,pannonic, pontic, steppic. Moreover, no other EuropeanUnion country possesses steppe region [72]. Its floraconsists of Western and Central European, as well asMediterranean spontaneous vegetal species, representingmore than half of the European flora [30]. More than700 species were identified as being traditional medicinalplants [74, 75]. A recent evaluation concluded that thereare 756 spontaneous medicinal plants in Romania, outof which 126 species are on the Red List, and 122 spe-cies are completely forbidden to be collected [76]. Sug-gestive for the ethnobotanical potential of Romania, isthe fact that Romania is on the list of the most import-ant European source regions of medicinal plants col-lected today from the wild, following behind otherSoutheastern European countries, such as Bulgaria andAlbania [77].Despite the richness of this biocultural heritage, the

studies focused on ethnopediatrics in Romania, as wellas in the rest of Europe, are absent. Therefore, we con-sidered that filling this gap represents a priority for sci-entists. In order to spur the use of Romanian (andEuropean) medicinal plants for the treatment of childrendiseases, we need first to review the historical use ofplants in ethnopediatrics.The main objective of the present review was to iden-

tify, collect, systematize, and prioritize the available bib-liographical data related to the medicinal plantstraditionally used to treat various pediatric diseases inRomania during the 1860s–1970s.


Materials and methodsWe have obtained ethnobotanical information by man-ual systematic search in various resources which are notcovered in the main electronic databases, such as journalpapers, reports, books and PhD works written inRomanian language. All of them, excepting one [11], areavailable in the Romanian Academy Library (https://biblacad.ro//eng_index.html) and/or in the RomanianNational Library (http://www.bibnat.ro/). Depending onthe methodology used by the authors of these publica-tions, the resources could be classified into four categor-ies: (A) original publications (based on field study-typemethodology) [9–11, 78–84]. Inclusion criterion wasthat the field work and observations had been performedbefore 1980, even if some of these studies where pub-lished after that date [85, 86] (or the studies included in-formants who were old enough, at the date of thefieldwork, to report plant use during the target period1860s–1970s [10, 11, 87]); (B) review publications (basedon documentation and synthesis of previous ethno-graphic or ethnobotanical works) [75]; (C) mixed publi-cations (compilation of original field study and review ofliterature) [74, 85, 86]; (D) other types of document pa-pers which report use of medicinal plants in children byRomanian people during the 1860s–1970s period [88].Table 1 contains a brief critical overview of all re-

sources used in this paper. In the following paragraphs,details are provided regarding the seven most represen-tative sources, ordered chronologically according to thedate ethnobotanical data were collected or published[whenever the collection date was not available or notapplicable (e.g., review work)]:

1. “Botanica Poporană Română” (engl. Romanian FolkBotany) by Simion Florea Marian (1847–1907), aRomanian folklorist, ethnographer, hystorian, andnaturalist, active member of the RomanianAcademy, one of the greatest collectors ofinformation and writers on the Romanian legacy ofmedicinal plants. Although he was a priest and forthe most of his life a schoolteacher, he is the onewho layed the foundations of scientific folkloreresearch in Romania. “Botanica Poporană Română”represents a monumental work of therapeuticalindications and folklore on medicinal plants inRomanian territory, collected by the author himselffrom hundreds of informants (whose names andresiding villages are mentioned in the book), during1867–1907. His correspondence attested the factthat he collaborated with specialists from theBotanical Institute in Bucharest to identify (i.e.,correctly establish the scientific names of) the plantvoucher specimens in his herbarium. Unfortunately,his work was published only recently, one century

after his death—this sorrowfully delayed publicationwas due to the huge efforts of an enthusiasticRomanian ethnographer, Aura Brădăţan [85, 86].This masterpiece was awarded a distinction byRomanian Science Academy, being considered atreasure of national culture.

2. Istoria naturală medicală a poporului român" (engl.Natural medical history of Romanian people) byNicolae Leon (1862–1931), a Romanian biologist,professor at the Faculty of Medicine, AlexandruIoan Cuza University, Iasi, published in 1903, inRomanian Academy Annals [84]. He had a veryrigurous approach in his fieldwork, in terms ofcriteria used for plants inclusion in his study. Hestated in the Foreword of the publication: “I havenot mentioned the vegetal remedies quoted bysome authors if I had not the possibility to makesure that the people use them indeed.(…)even ifthey were counted by Czihak and Szabo as folkmedicinal plants(…) Even if they were counted byCzihak and Szabo as folk medicinal plants, theplants that I could not identify because of the lackof voucher specimens are all gathered in Notes, atthe end of the Chapter I, and only their use isindicating, without the scientific name.” Thepublication contains a special chapter entitled“Numiri vulgare cu cari poporul cunoşte bolele”(engl. Folk names by which people know thediseases), where the author offers the clinicalpicture of the diseases treated by Romanian folkmedicine and also provides the scientific medicalterms corresponding to a series of folk terms.

3. “Monografia comunei Răşinariu” (engl. Monographyof Răşinariu village), by Victor Păcală (1874–1955)[9], awarded a distinction by Romanian Academy in1916, is considered the best monography of aRomanian village written before the First WorldWar [89], and represents even today a model forhow a comprehensive descriptive ethnographicmonography should be written.

4. “Contribuţiuni la etnografia medicală a Olteniei”(engl. Contribution to the medical ethnography ofOltenia) [82], by Charles Laugier (1875–1930)was granted Botez Prize by Romanian Academyin 1927. Charles Laugier was a physician whograduated from Carol Davila Faculty of Medicinein Bucharest in 1898. Latter he became Directorand Sanitary Inspector for Oltenia region. Duringhis regular inspections, he collected a lot ofethnographic information, includingethnobotanical and ethnomedical data which iscited even today by specialists. Laugier offers atthe end of his publication a list withcorrespondences between folk terms designating


https://biblacad.ro/eng_index.htmlhttps://biblacad.ro/eng_index.htmlhttp://www.bibnat.ro/

Table

1Resourcesused

forthehistoricalreview

onmed

icinalplantsused

inRo

manianethn

oped

iatryin

1860s–1970s

Title

Autho

rYear

ofpu

blication

Sources(and

metho

dology)

Trustlevelinterm

sof

plant(criterion1+

criterio

n2)a

nddisease

iden

tification

Reference

1)“BotanicaPo

porană

Română”

(eng

l.Roman

ianFolk

Botany)

SimionFlorea

Marian

2008,2010(post-mortem

publication;data

collected

durin

g1867-

1907)

Fieldw

ork(observatio

nalm

etho

d,collectionof

plantvouche

rspecim

ens);literature

(review

)5(2+3)

(plants)

3(diseases)

[85,86]

2)“Istoria

naturalămed

icalăapo

poruluirom

ân”

(eng

l.Naturalmedicalhistoryof

Roman

ianpeople)

Nicolae

Leon

1903

Fieldw

ork(observatio

nalm

etho

d,iden

tification

ofplantsbasedon

collectionof

vouche

rspecim

ens)

6(3+3)

(plants)

4(diseases)

[84]

3)“M

onog

rafia

comun

eiRăşin

ariu”(eng

l.Mon

ograph

yof

Răşin

ariuvillage)

Victor

Păcală

1915

Fieldw

ork(ethno

graphicmetho

d-participant

observation,keyinform

antinterviewing;

completeinventoryof

localflora)

4(1+3)

(plants)

2(diseases)

[9]

4)“Con

tribuţiuni

laetno

grafiamed

icalăaOlteniei”

(eng

l.Co

ntributionto

themedicalethn

ograph

yof

Oltenia)

CharlesLaug

ier

1925

Fieldw

ork(observatio

nalm

etho

d)4(1+3)

(plants)

4(diseases)

[82]

5)“Boli,leacurişip

lantede

leac

cuno

scutede

ţărănimea

română”

(eng

l.Diseases,folkremedies

andplan

tsknow

nby

Roman

ianvillagers)

Geo

rgeBu

jorean

1936

Fieldw

ork(observatio

nalm

etho

d);literature

(review

)6(3+3)

(plants)

4(diseases)

[74]

6)“Plantelemed

icinaleşimed

icinapo

pulară

laNiscani”(Eng

l.Medicinalplan

tsan

dfolkmedicineat

Niscan

i)

AlexeiA

.Arvat

(1890-

?),

1937

Fieldw

ork(observatio

nalm

etho

d,keyinform

ant

interviewing,

inventoryof

ethn

obotanicaland

ethn

ograph

icdata,collectionof

plantvouche

rspecim

ens)

6(3+

3)(plants)

4(diseases)

[80]

7)“Enciclope

diade

Etno

botanică

Românească”

(eng

l.Encyclopediaof

Roman

ianEthn

obotan

y)ValerBu

tura

1979

Literature

(review

)6(3+3)

(plants)

4(diseases)

[75]

8)“Plantecuno

scuteşiîntreb

uinţatede

românii

dinArdeal.Noteetno

botanice”(eng

l.Plan

tsknow

nan

dused

byRoman

ians

inArdeal.Ethno

botanicaln

otes)

ValerBu

tura

1935

Fieldw

ork(observatio

nalm

etho

d)6(3+3)

(plants)

3(diseases)

[83]

9)“Plantecuno

scuteşiîntreb

uinţatede

româniidin

Transilvania”(eng

l.Plan

tsknow

nan

dused

byRoman

ians

inTran

silvania)

ValerBu

tura

1936

Fieldw

ork(observatio

nalm

etho

d)6(3+3)

(plants)

4(diseases)

[79]

10)“Plantecuno

scuteşiîntreb

uinţatede

locuito

riicâtorvasate

româneşti(Ethno

botanische

mitteilung

enausRu

manien)”(eng

l.Plan

tsknow

nan

dused

byinha

bitans

offewRoman

ianvillages)

ValerBu

tura

1938

Fieldw

ork(observatio

nalm

etho

d)6(3+

3)(plants)

4(diseases)

[78]

8)“Florilebu

nede

leac”(eng

l.Flow

ersgood

forhealing)

Geo

rgeUlieru

1929

Med

icalliteratureessay

2(1+1)

(plants)

4(diseases)

[88]

9)“Nou

tatietno

botanice

româneşti”

(eng

l.Roman

ian

ethn

obotan

icalno

velties)

Alexand

ruBo

rza

1936

Fieldw

ork(observatio

nalm

etho

d,collectionof

plantvouche

rspecim

ens)

6(3+3)

(plants)

3(diseases)

[81]

10)“Studiid

eetno

botanică

încomun

aPo

iana

Cristei,

jud.

Vrancea”

(eng

l.Ethn

obotan

icalstudiesin

Poiana

Cristeivillage,Vrancea

coun

ty)

Ana

Con

drea

1991

Fieldw

ork(observatio

nalm

etho

d,oldinform

ant

interviewing)

6(3+3)

(plants)

4(diseases)

[87]

11)“Valea

Sebe

şului.Mon

ografie

Etno

folclorică,vol.II.

Folclor”(eng

l.Sebeşv

alley.Ethn

ofolkloricalmon

ograph

y,Ghe

orgh

ePavelescu

2004

(datacollected

in1934-1939,anden

riche

dFieldw

ork(observatio

nalm

etho

d,inform

ant

interviewing)

5(3+2)

(plants)

2(diseases)

[10]


Table

1Resourcesused

forthehistoricalreview

onmed

icinalplantsused

inRo

manianethn

oped

iatryin

1860s–1970s(Con

tinued)

Title

Autho

rYear

ofpu

blication

Sources(and

metho

dology)

Trustlevelinterm

sof

plant(criterion1+

criterio

n2)a

nddisease

iden

tification

Reference

vol.II,Folklor)

in1971)

12)“M

edicinapo

pulară

dinBasarabiade

lasfârșitul

secoluluialX

IX-lea–începu

tulsecolului

alXX

-lea.

Aspecte

istorico-etno

grafice”

(eng

l.Folkmedicinefro

mBasarabiaat

theendof

the19th

-beginn

ingof

the20th

centuries.Historical-ethno

graphicalaspects)

NataliaGradinaru

2015

(datacollected

durin

g2003-2014;average

ageof

inform

ants71.5

years)

Fieldw

ork(observatio

nalm

etho

d,qu

estio

nnaires,

simulation-

toreveal“professionalsecrets”,case

stud

y);literature

(review

offield

stud

iesavailable

intheArchivesof

theInstitu

teof

theCultural

Heritage

,Chişin

ău)

6(3+

3)(plants)

4(diseases)

[11]


plants/diseases and scientific botanical/medicalterms.

5. “Boli, leacuri şi plante de leac cunoscute deţărănimea română” (engl. Diseases, folk remediesand plants known by Romanian villagers) publishedin 1936 by another important figure in Romanianethnobotany, George Bujorean (1893–1971),botanist and founder of Romanian experimentalecology and geobiology [74]. This publicationbecame a national reference work for its period.Bujorean discovered several new plants withmedicinal properties, which were used in Romanianfolk medicine, but were not mentioned inDragendorff’s publication, which was recognized atthat time as the world’s ethnopharmacologicalreference list of medicinal plants [90] (e.g.,Trifolium campestre L, Sempervivum marmoreumGriseb., known at that time by its synonym,Sempervivum assimile Schott).

6. “Plantele medicinale si medicina populara laNişcani” (Engl. Medicinal plants and folk medicineat Nişcani) by Alexei A. Arvat (1890-?), a botanistwell known in Romanian ethnographic world. Hegraduated Natural Sciences at Iassy University andpublished several valuable ethnobotanical worksduring his life. The one relevant for our presentreview is a comprehensive field study performed inthe Nişcani village, Basarabia, during which hefound 140 medicinal species traditionally usedagainst 137 diseases. One of his conclusions issignificant for the value of the local ethnobotanicalknowledge: the number of medicinal species knownto the population of Nişcani was close to the totalnumber of species in that area, his informantsclaiming that “all the weeds have healing properties,only the people do not know” [80]. He alsoidentified during this study new vernacular namesfor 41 Romanian medicinal plants. Anotherinteresting conclusion of this work was thatmedicinal plants were used in folk medicine inNişcani in a much higher proportion (85%) thanother remedies (e.g., incantations- descântece,organic or inorganic substances, etc.).

7. “Enciclopedia de Etnobotanică Românească” (engl.Encyclopedia of Romanian Ethnobotany) by ValeriuButura (1910–1989) is a remarkable synthesis workwhich reveals more than 100 years of traditionalRomanian medicine practice [75]. He was abotanist, student of another great Romanianethnographer Alexandru Borza (1887–1971). ValerButura started his ethnobotanical studies in 1930–1940 [78, 79, 83]. His encyclopedia containing morethan 700 medicinal plants with traditional uses waspublished in 1979, 10 years after his professor

published another reference work Ethnobotanicaldictionary (containing 2095 species with over 11000Romanian names of plants) in 1968 [91].

We estimated for each source used the trust level interms of plant identification, using two graded criteria,as follows:Criterion 1 (author’s background): 3—author was bot-

anist, biologist, or anthopologist; 2—the author was nota botanist, biologist, or anthropologist, but collaboratedwith botanists for the identification of plants; 1—authorwas a physician or self-educated in terms of botanicaland anthropological studies; 0—author was none of theprevious.Criterion 2 (plant identification): 3—if the author was

able to differentiate between medicinal plants withclaimed clear botanical identity and plants with unre-solved botanical identity, and all the plants with claimedclear botanical identity had Latin names which were ei-ther accepted names or synonyms of the accepted namesin The Euro+Med PlantBase (http://ww2.bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed) [92] and/or The Plant List (www.theplantlist.org) [93]; 2—if the Latin names of the majorityof medicinal plants claimed to have a clear botanicalidentity were either accepted names or synonyms of theaccepted names in The Euro+Med PlantBase (http://ww2.bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed) [92] and/or The Plant List(www.theplantlist.org )[93]; 1—if the Latin names of themedicinal plants were available for a small percentage oftaxa, or a significant number of plant had unresolvednames in The Euro+Med PlantBase (http://ww2.bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed) [92] and/or The Plant List (www.theplantlist.org) [93], or Latin names were not available(and plant identification was based on the vernacularname).The sum of grades for the two criteria represented the

trust level in terms of plant identification. The highestpossible grade was 6 (3 + 3), and the lowest possiblegrade was 1 (0 + 1).Whatever the trust level of the source, we did not

include plants with unclear botanical identity in ourwork.We estimated for each source also the trust level in

terms of disease identification, as follows: 4—in thesource, the diseases are identified by their scientificnames or by both their folk and scientific names; 3—some diseases are identified by their scientific names,others only by their folk names; 2—diseases are identi-fied only by their folk names, whose modern medicalequivalents could be determined nonetheless by meansof dictionaries or other resources [74, 84, 94]; 1—dis-eases are designated only by folk terms whose signifi-cance in modern medical terms could not be establishedwith the help of dictionaries or other resources. The


http://ww2.bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed/http://ww2.bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed/http://www.theplantlist.org/http://www.theplantlist.org/http://ww2.bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed/http://ww2.bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed/http://www.theplantlist.org/http://ww2.bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed/http://ww2.bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed/http://www.theplantlist.org/http://www.theplantlist.org/

higher the grade, the higher the trust level. The high-est possible grade was 4, and the lowest possiblegrade was 1.A medicinal plant was included in our database if its

traditional use was mentioned by at least one author.Despite the fact that the majority of the dietary plants

may be used for children, those species where pediatricindications were implicit (due to their dietary value)were excluded from our study, while only the specieswith explicit pediatric indications (mentioned in theethnographic text as such) were included. For instance,plants like Urtica dioica, Malus domesticus, Vitis vinif-era, Persica vulgaris, Petroselinum sativum, Raphanussativum, etc. were excluded, despite their ethnopediatricpotential. Beside the objective restrictions imposed bythe limited availability of written resources, this ap-proach was adopted in order to (1) reduce to zero/nullifythe risk of selecting a wrong plant, (2) avoid overloadingthe paper with too many common plants with universaldietary value, and (3) identify local non-nutritional medi-cinal plants with pediatric indications, which might beless known to the scientific community.Regarding the name of the plants—in our sources a

perimated Latin term was sometimes used for speciesidentification. In all these cases, the perimated Latinterm was changed to the presently accepted one (e.g.,Galium odoratum (L.) Scop. instead of Asperula odorataL.). More often than not, a given species had several ver-nacular names—in such cases, all the various vernacularnames encountered in our sources were gathered as aunique entry under the accepted Latin name (e.g., “sân-ziene de pădure,” “vinariţă,” and “mama pădurii” are puttogether under the accepted latin name Galium odora-tum (L.) Scop.).Data analysis and extraction were performed by med-

ical professionals involved in clinical and scientific re-search at academic level. All data were cross examinedby a second author.Concerning the indigenous classification of diseases in

Romanian traditional medicine, to the best of our know-ledge, no systematic classification is provided by theavailable historical resources. In order to avoid suppress-ing the cultural traits, we have adapted the InternationalClassification of Primary Care (ICPC) [95] to our set ofdata. ICPC was reported to be a closer approximation toethnomedical reality and emic perspective, than othermodern classifications such as International StatisticalClassification of Diseases and Related Health Problems(ICD) or the Economic Botany Data Collection Standard(EBDCS) [96].Preliminary data concerning traditional pediatric indi-

cations and the parts used were organized in a tabularform. Afterwards, we performed a second systematicsearch in PubMed for all the medicinal plants recorded

for ethnopediatric use which were included in our data-base, in order to identify whether their therapeutic po-tential was evaluated or not in clinical pediatric studies.

Data analysisWe divided the collected bibliographic material into usecategories such as various types of diseases, based on theInternational Classification of Primary Care (ICPC)(WHO | International Classification of Primary Care,Second edition (ICPC-2), 2012).In order to compare the utility of medicinal plants in

Romanian ethnopediatry, we proposed one index: Ethno-pediatric Relative Therapeutic Versatility (ETRV).In our analysis, all ethnopedriatic uses included under

the umbrella of a certain targeted body system werecounted as one. For each medicinal plant, we summedup all the targeted body systems and obtained a valuedesignated as BS. Phylogenetically closely related medi-cinal plants (the single case of Populus spp.), which hadsimilar ethnomedical uses, were counted together, as asingle phytotherapic entity. The formula used for thecalculation of ERTV expressed as percentage was:

ERTV% ¼ BSiBS max

� 100

where BSi—number of body systems targeted by theplant i; BSmax—maximum number of body systems tar-geted by a single plant obtained in our bibliographicstudy (which is seven). For example, Gratiola officinalisis traditionally used to treat six body systems, one lessthan 7, corresponding to Dryopteris filix-mas (L.) Schott,the most versatile of all species. Therefore, it has ERTVof 85.71% (6:7 ×100).Altogether, more than 30 local publications were used

for this historical review to collect information aboutmedicinal plants used in Romania (1860s–1970s), butonly in 15 publications we have found relevant data forethnopediatrics. Since some of the publications rely onidentical sources (e.g., George Bujorean [74] is cited byother ethnographers, such Valer Butura [75]), we consid-ered that the number of citations did not express therelative importance of the species in Romanianethnopediatrics.

ResultsWe have identified in the available literature several oldRomanian terms comprising children-specific diseases(acrum—newborn aphthous stomatitis, babiţi—digestivetroubles in children caused by tooth eruption, boalacânească/socote/sohote/zilizit—athrepsia, severe nutri-tional disturbance in small children, boala copiilor/răulcopiilor/răutatea copiilor/ceas rău/samca/sanca—con-vulsions, epilepsy, coriu/coriu adevărat/bubatu al mic—


measles, coriu negru—scarlet fever, focușor—red papulareruptions on face or chest in children, lamoste—childdysentery, mătrice—cramps in newborns due to abdom-inal gas accumulation, muma pădurii—nightmares/in-somnia/weeping during night in small children, oase moi(“soft bones”)/oase strâmbe (“curved bones”)—rickets,opăreală—diaper/napkin dermatitis, rahnă—cold,pleasnă/plesne—irritation of lingual and palatal mucosaor aphtous stomatitis, especially in small children,rodimcic—nervous spasms, convulsions, cramps in new-borns, strâns—diarrhea of children, suldumaș or surdu-maș—small red papular eruption on the newborn scalp,tuse măgărească—whooping cough) or disorders com-mon in both adults and children (apucătură- colic,arâne/fudulie- scabies, boli lipicioase- contagious dis-eases, bubă- abscess/pustule/purulent subcutaneous col-lection, bube dulci/rofii/rohii—impetigo, cufureală/treapăd—diarrhea, gîlci—tonsillitis, izdat/surdumaci—abdominal pains, mărgăritărel—stomatitis, scrofuri—tu-berculosis of the lymph nodes, trecătură—gastro-enter-itis) [74, 75, 85, 94, 97]. Some of them are still used inthe modern language (e.g., tuse măgărească, bube dulci,cufureală, gîlci).After adaptation of the International Classification of

Primary Care (ICPC) [95] to our set of data, we had 12categories of body system-related pediatric diseases(Table 1).A total of 153 medicinal plants belonging to 52 fam-

ilies were identified as having ethnopediatric relevance—

they are presented in the alphabetical order of theirLatin name in Table 3, which also includes the medicalindications, targeted body systems, parts used, way ofadministration (where available), and ERTV. Half of thespecies (49.67%) used in Romanian traditional medicineto treat children diseases belong to seven families: Aster-aceae (21), Lamiaceae (15), Apiaceae (12), Rosaceae(ten), Fabaceae (seven), Ranunculaceae (six), Brassica-ceae (five).The plant indications, targeted body systems, parts

used, way of administration (where available), ERTV,and available scientific evidence are provided in Table 2.The distribution of the plants with respect to their

medical indications is as follows: blood, lymph andspleen diseases (five species), cardiovascular (one), di-gestive (53), ear (two), endocrine, metabolic, and nutri-tional (28), general (45), musculoskeletal (11),neurological (22), psychological (26), respiratory (14),skin (44), urological diseases/conditions (one).The top of the seven most versatile plants in Roma-

nian ethnopediatry is represented in Fig. 1.Only 15 medicinal plants were scientifically evaluated

in pediatric clinical studies, or at least in human clinicalstudies with mixed groups of subjects (adults and chil-dren). For six plants, we found some positive evidencefor few indications mentioned in Romanian ethnopedia-trics; for ten medicinal plants, some positive evidencefor certain indications not mentioned in Romanian eth-nopediatrics, and for one plant some negative evidence.

Table 2 Classification of ethnopediatric indications in the present study, adapted after the International Classification ofPrimary Care (ICPC)

Category Examples of diseases

General and unspecified Asthenia, Chicken pox/Varicella, Scarlet fever, Colic, Cramps, Fever, Measles/Rubeola,German measles/Rubella, Spasms, Tuberculosis, Weakness, Physical debility

Blood, blood forming organs, lymphatics and spleen Anemia, Enlarged lymph nodes, Scrophulosis

Cardiovascular Tachycardia

Digestive Abdominal cramps, Abdominal pain, Acute digestive infections, Colitis, Constipation,Dental abscesses, Dental cavities, Dental eruption, Diarrhea, Digestive cramps, Dysentery,Enteritis, Flatulence, Intestinal cramps, Intestinal parasites, Intestinal worms, Stomatitis,Tape worms, Teeth ache/pain, Ulcerative stomatitis, Vomiting

Ear Ear discharge, Ear pain

Musculoskeletal Bone diseases, Bone deformities, Disability/Weakness of the extremities Rickets, Trauma

Neurological Convulsions, Epilepsy, Paralysis

Psychological Agitation, Anxiety/Fright, Enuresis, Irritability, Sleep disturbances/Insomnia/ Nightmares/weeping during sleep, Psychosis

Respiratory Acute respiratory diseases, Asthma, Bronchitis, Phlegm in the throat, Cold, Cough, Coughwith sputa and puss, Whooping cough, Respiratory infections, Tonsillitis

Skin Acne, Burn wounds/Burns, Dermatitis, Diaper (napkin) dermatitis, Eczema, Hair complaint,Skin inflammation, Skin infections, Impetigo, Scabies, Skin lesions, Subcutaneous tumors,Verruca, Wounds

Endocrine, metabolic and nutritional Anorexia/Loss of appetite, Athrepsia, Cashexia, Growth dysfunctions/Growth delay,Underweight, Nutritional dysbalances

Urology Anuria, Oliguria


DiscussionEthnopediatrics in Europe, as well as in Romania,represents a neglected field of research. Many potentialreasons could explain this fact. Regarding clinical trials(not only with herbal medicines, but also with syntheticdrugs) in this vulnerable population, we should take intoaccount, first of all, that The European PediatricRegulation was adopted only recently, in 2006, and en-tered into force in 2007 [120]. Moreover, scientists facemultiple challenges related to small subjects’ population,economical burdens, pharmacological issues (extra-tox-icity test required, higher risks of unpredictable severeadverse reactions in children than in adults), ethical con-cerns, necessity of additional parental consent, multipleage groups with specific needs and dramatic differencesbetween them, difficulties in communication with chil-dren, high percentage (60%) of children who do notassent to take part in research studies, high rate ofwithdrawal, etc. [121, 122]. Owing to all these con-straints, it was suggested to use all available knowledge(e.g., clinical pharmacology data generated by usingmany therapeutic agents with no approved dosing labelsand guidance), as well as modeling and simulation ap-proaches in drug development [123]. We have proposedhere a complementary solution to fill the actual gap inthe pediatric research: to use all available, but neglectedethnopediatric knowledge, starting with systematic ana-lysis of historical resources, and following with fieldstudies. The present paper follows this direction, focus-ing on the review of medicinal plants used in Romanianethnopediatrics in the 1860s–1970s.More than 700 common species of medicinal plants

are listed in various resources as being used inRomanian traditional medicine [74, 75, 124]. According

to the present study, around one-fifth of them arehighlighted as having ethnopediatric indications. Wehave also noticed that a great part of the indications ofphytoremedies in children are for acute diseases: from atotal of approximately 80 different types of illnesses,about two-thirds were acute (e.g., acute respiratory dis-eases, acute digestive disorders with vomiting and diar-rhea, intestinal colic and other types of pains, spasms,wounds, chicken pox, scarlet fever, dental eruption, etc.)(see Table 1). This fact is expected since children oftenhave acute, short-term illnesses [125]. Also, some of themost common adult diseases that are chronic (e.g.,cardiovascular, central nervous system and oncologicaldiseases) are less frequent in children [126].Some of these plants have been cultivated and have

been part of everyday Romanian diet for many cen-turies: aromatic plants (e.g., Foeniculum vulgare,Mentha piperita, Levisticum officinale), fruits andseeds (e.g., Pyrus communis, Rosa canina, Juglansregia, Cucurbita pepo), vegetables (e.g., Zea mays,Phaseolus vulgaris, Vicia faba, etc.), various recipesbeing preserved during the centuries, especially in therural communities [30, 127]. Some particular Roma-nian plant-based dishes, which are also consumed bychildren, are pumpkin pie (from Muntenia area), beansoup (from Transylvania), home-made noodles (“iofca”)prepared with cabbage, nuts, poppy (from Banat)[127]. Interestingly, the experts in food sciences sug-gested that the traditional cooking methods andhabits seem to selectively preserve the specific beneficactivities of different phytochemicals [128, 129]; there-fore, we suggest that studying the traditional recipesmay inspire new extraction methods of bioactiveconstituents.

Fig. 1 Top 7 of the most versatile plants in Romanian ethnopediatry (Ethnopediatric Relative Therapeutic Versatility- ERTV- expressed as percentage)


Concerning the fact that only some of the plants werespecifically marked for use in children in the studiedbook and papers, a question arises: what is the reason orreasons behind this specification? We can onlyhypothesize. Potential explanations are the following:these plants might have been more frequently used orconsidered to be more efficient in their therapeutic ac-tivity by the informants or ethnographers, the informantmight had a special direct experience with that plant, acertain plant or plant use might had a special value for alocal community or for a family of healers, transmittedinformation might have been uncomplete due to weakmemory of the informant. It was also suggested that thetraditional ethnopharmacological knowledge is unevenlydistributed (e.g., women, as managers of householdhealth and mothers, might know more about ethnope-diatric remedies than men; differential acces to the land-scapes, such as forests, and therefore to certainmedicinal plants; increased amount of knowledge withage of informant, etc.) [130–133].

Ways of medicinal plant administration in ethnopediatryin RomaniaIn Romanian ethnopediatry, medicinal plants are pre-pared in various ways, which are intended for internaluse (infusions, decoctions, syrups), external use (baths,ointments, cataplasms, fumigations, inhalations), orboth (infusions, decoctions). Alcoholic preparationsare in general not recommended in Romanian (eth-no)pediatry [85]. The reason is obvious, since alcoholis known to be toxic when administered to children[134, 135]. WHO proposed the limitation in the etha-nol content of pediatric products to less than 0.5%[136]. We noticed that the most frequently cited wayof administration for small children in Romanian eth-nopediatry was by bath, not only for skin diseases,but also for internal diseases, such as digestive orneurological ones, due to the fact that the quantitiesof phytochemicals absorbed through the skin, albeitsmall, are sufficient to be active in young children,particularly because phytochemicals can reach thebloodstream easier through the skin in small childrenthan by internal administration in adults [137–139].

Use of toxic plants in Romanian ethnopediatryIn our bibliographic study, we have noticed that inRomanian ethnopediatry some of the toxic alkaloid-richspecies (Aconitum napellus, Dryopteris filix-mas, andTanacetum vulgare) have been traditionally prescribedunder rigorous dosing, with the specification of in-creased toxicity [75, 86, 124], some of them even forinternal use (e.g., Acontium napellus for epilepsy, Dryop-teris filix-mas for scrophulosis)! We have noticed insome of these cases that the traditional recipe is usually

a polyherbal multimineral formula, with a complicatedway of preparation. The rationale behind this may be thereduction of plant/mineral toxicity, similarly to theherbo-mineral ayurvedic preparations called rasa ousha-dies [140]. We give one such example from Romanianethnomedicine. In Bucovina, the peasants used to pre-pare a decoction of wolfsbane (Aconitus napellus L.) andsilver thistle (Carlina acaulis L.), over which they addedsineala (syn. ultramarine), a blue mineral dyestuff usedin the past to bleach the laundry, obtained by melting amixture of kaolin, sodium carbonate, wood ash, and sul-fur. This complex liquid preparation was administeredto the child suffering from epilepsy (Rom. raul copiilor),both internally (a very small amount) and externally (asa whole body washing) [86].

Comparison of relative therapeutic versatility of topmedicinal plants in Romanian ethnopediatryConcerning the ERTV index, we discovered several in-teresting facts. Surprisingly, the versatility hierarchy istopped by two less commonly used medicinal plantswith toxic potential: fern (Dryopteris filix-mas) withERTV 100% and gratiole (Gratiola officinalis) withERTV 85.71%. Not unexpectedly, next to these two spe-cies were four common medicinal species, used in manyparts of the globe in ethnopediatry [garlic (Allium sati-vum), nut tree (Juglans regia), chamomile (Matricariachamomilla), and broadleaf plantain (Plantago major)],and another one less known for its ethnopediatric use,blue eryngo (Eryngium planum), all having equal scores(ERTV 71.42%). Dryopteris filix-mas’ biological activitiesare not yet scientifically studied, except for its antiin-flammatory potential (one animal study) [141]. Gratiolaofficinalis’ therapeutic activity is more evidence based;its anti-inflammatory (correlated with its ethnopediatricuse in eczema, see Table 3) and sedative (correlated withits ethnopediatric indication in fright during sleep, seeTable 3) potential being partially supported by animal orin vitro studies [142, 143]. Nevertheless, its ethnopedia-tric use in physical debility, epilepsy, paralysis, andtachycardia has no scientific support yet.Garlic (Allium sativum) (ERTV 71.42%) was used for

centuries in different cultures for the treatment of manydiseases and is also one of the best studied herbal rem-edies [144]. Several recent studies raised the possibilityof revival of some of its ethnopharmacological uses(mentioned also in Romanian folk medicine), which maybe beneficial in child infections [99, 100], respiratory dis-eases [101]. In vitro experiments revealed some furthertherapeutic properties (benefits in alopecia areata [102],anticancer activity [145]).Walnut tree (Juglans regia, Juglandaceae) (ERTV

71.42% ) is a tree known to humankind since prehistorictimes, its fruits representing an important source of


Table

3Med

icinalplantsused

inethn

oped

iatricsin

Romania(1860s–1970s)

No.

Species

Family

Englishname

Romanian

name

Orig

inTradition

alindicatio

nsandtargeted

body

system

sPartsused

ERTV

(%)

References

fortradition

alindicatio

ns

Scientificeviden

cein

pediatric

clinicalstud

ies

1.Acercampestre

L.Sapind

aceae

Fieldmaple

Jugastru

Native

1.Gen

eral:W

eakness(fo

rge

neral

streng

then

ing;

ext-bath,int-sap)

Bark,Sap

14.28

[75,86]

n.y.s.

2.Acon

itum

napellusL.

Ranu

nculaceae

Wolfsbane

Omag,

toaie

Native

1.Neurological:Epilepsy(int.,ext-bath)

2.Skin

(ext):Wou

nds

Leaves,

Root

28.57

[75,86]

n.y.s

3.Allium

ascalonicum

L.Amaryllidaceae

Shallot

Haşmă,

hajm

e,hagima

Non

-native

1.Skin:Eczem

a,Im

petig

o(ext),scalpred

erup

tions

ofne

wbo

rnBu

lb,

leaves

14.28

[75,84,86]

n.y.s.

4.Allium

cepa

L.Amaryllidaceae

Onion

Ceapă

Non

-native

1.Respiratory:A

sthm

a,Bron

chitis,

Cou

gh;2.D

igestive:Stom

achpain,

intestinalcolic

(ext

+int),Tapeworms,

Cramps

inne

wbo

rnsdu

eto

accumulationof

gas(int-1drop

juiceof

onion),U

lcerativestom

atitis,Den

tal

erup

tion;3.Ear:pain;4.Skin:ne

wbo

rnscalperup

tions

(ext)

Bulb,

leaves

57.14

[9,75,84–86

]p.e.Skin:alope

ciaareata-effectivetopical

therapy(Note.mixed

grou

pof

adultand

child

subjects)[98]

5.Allium

sativum

L.Amaryllidaceae

Garlic

Usturoi

Non

-native

1.Digestive:Intestinalworms,Diarrhe

a,Gastro-en

teritis,C

olic

2.Respiratory:C

ough

with

sputaand

puss

3.Skin

(ext):Verruca,Skin

infections,

Impe

tigo

4.Psycho

logical:nigh

tmares

5.Neurological::epilepsy(ext-polyherbal

ointmen

t,in

combinatio

nwith

lovage

,elecam

pane

,and

othe

rplantswith

unresolved

botanicalide

ntity)

Bulb,

leaves

71.42

[74,75,82,

84,86]

p.e.antib

acterialn

.e.antifung

al-as

polyhe

rbalmou

thrin

se[99];p

.e.

antiverruca

[100];p.e.respiratory

diseases

(improved

oxygen

ationanddyspne

ain

childrenwith

hepatopu

lmon

ary

synd

rome)

[101];n.e.topicaln

on-effective

therapyin

alop

eciaareata[102]

6.Althaea

officinalisL.

Malvaceae

Marsh

mallow

Nalbă

mare

Native

1.Digestive:Diarrhe

a2.Skin:d

iape

r(napkin)

derm

atitis

Flow

ers,

leaves,

roots

28.57

[75,88]

n.y.s

7.Am

ygdalus

commun

isL.

Rosaceae

Alm

ondtree

Migdal

Non

-native

1.Ear:Earpain,Ear

discharge

Buds,

seed

s,flowers,

bark

14.28

[86]

*p.e.-↓

symptom

sin

attention-de

ficit/

hype

ractivity

disorder

[103]

8.An

emon

epulsa

tillaL.

Ranu

nculaceae

Pasque

flower

Ded

iţel,

sisine

lNative

1.Psycho

logical:Insomnia(ext-

fumigations)

Flow

ers

14.28

[75]

n.y.s.

9.An

ethu

mgraveolens

L.Apiaceae

Dill

Mărar

Native

1.Digestive:Abd

ominalcram

ps,C

olic,

Intestinalworms(ro

undw

orms)

Aerial

parts,

Seed

s

14.28

[75,84,86]

p.e.antip

arasitic(↓incide

nceof

Giardia

lambliaafter5days

oftreatm

ent)[104]

10.

Anthyllis

vulnerariaL.

Fabaceae

Wou

ndwort

Vătămătoare

Native

1.Skin:Eczem

a,Wou

nds(ext);

2.Psycho

logical:Fear,Frig

ht(int)

Flow

ering

tips

28.57

[75,83]

n.y.s.

11.

Aquilegia

vulgarisL.

Ranu

nculaceae

Colum

bine

Căldăruşă

Native

1.Respiratory:W

hoop

ingcoug

h(ext)

Aerial

parts

14.28

[75]

n.y.s.


Table

3Med

icinalplantsused

inethn

oped

iatricsin

Romania(1860s–1970s)(Con

tinued)

No.

Species

Family

Englishname

Romanian

name

Orig

inTradition

alindicatio

nsandtargeted

body

system

sPartsused

ERTV

(%)

References

fortradition

alindicatio

ns

Scientificeviden

cein

pediatric

clinicalstud

ies

12.

Arctium

lappa

L.Asteraceae

Greater

burdock

Brusture

Native

1.Skin:W

ound

s;infections;Eczem

a;2.

Digestive:cram

ps(ext)

Leaves

14.28

[75,86]

n.y.s.

13.

Arnica

mon

tana

L.Asteraceae

Mou

ntain

arnica

Arnică

Native

1.Musculoskeletal:Traum

a(ext);2.

Psycho

logical:Anxiety/frigh

t(onlythe

plantcollected

ontheCross

Day)(ext-

fumigations)

Leaves

28.57

[75,85]

n.y.s.

14.

Artemisia

abrotanu

mL.

Asteraceae

Sage

brush

Lemnu

ldo

mnu

lui,

lemnu

ş

Native

1.Gen

eral:w

eakness(ext-w

eeklybath,

floweringtip

s)2.Digestive:Stom

atitis(ext-leaves

inho

ney,chew

ingtw

igs),colic(int-milk

decoctionof

bark)

3.Musculoskeletal:riketts(ext-bath

weekly,floweringtip

s)

Leaves,

Flow

ering

tips,Bark

42.85

[75,84,86]

n.y.s.

15.

Artemisia

absin

thium

L.Asteraceae

Wormwoo

dPelin

Native

1.Nutritional:Athrepsia(ext-crushe

dfre

shleaves)

2.Neurological:Epilepsy(ext-bath)

Leaves

28.57

[74,75,84]

n.y.s.

16.

Arun

cusdioicus

(Walter)

Fernald

Rosaceae

Goat's

beard,

bride'sfeathe

rsCoada

priculicilor,

barbapo

pii

Native

1.Neurological:Epilepsy(ext-bath,

fumigation)

2.Psycho

logical:Insomnia(ext-bath,

fumigation)

Aerial

parts

28.57

[85]

n.y.s.

17.

Astragalus

glycyphyllosL.

Fabaceae

Wild

liquo

rice

Ung

hiagăii,

ungh

iacăţelei,iarba

limbricilor

Native

1.Skin

(ext):Eczema,Diape

r(napkin)

derm

atitis(washing

with

decoctionin

milk),Necrotic

wou

nds(Rom

.“colţde

lup”-cutane

oustube

rculosisor

cutane

ouslesion

sin

syph

ilis),Infectio

ns,

Panaris

Aerial

parts

14.28

[75,78,80,84

]n.y.s.

18.

Ballota

nigraL.

Lamiaceae

Black

horeho

und

Urzică

moartă,

cătuşe

Non

-native

1.Gen

eral:for

sufferin

gchildren(ext-

bath)

Aerial

parts

14.28

[80]

n.y.s.

19Berteroa

incana

(L.)DC.

Brassicaceae

Hoary

alyssum

Ciucuşoară,

păsatul

vraghiei

Native

1.Skin:infectio

ns(ext

),eczema(ext-

bath)

Aerial

parts

14.28

[75,80]

n.y.s.

20.

Betulapend

ula

Roth

Betulaceae

Silver

birch

Mesteacăn

Native

1.Nutritional:Athrepsia,N

utritional

dysbalances,grow

thde

lay(ext-sapor

bath

with

decoctionof

bark

from

ayoun

gtree)

Sapof

the

youn

gtree,b

ark

ofa

youn

gtree

14.28

[9,74]

n.y.s.

21.

Betula

pubescens

Ehrh.

Betulaceae

White

birch

Mesteacăn

alb

Native

1.Nutritional:Athrepsia,N

utritional

dysbalances,Growth

delay(ext-bath)

Sapof

the

youn

gtree

14.28

[74]

n.y.s.

22.

Bidens

tripartitus

L.Asteraceae

Three-lobe

begg

articks

Den

tiţă,

cîrlige

i,Native

1.Gen

eral:W

eakness(fo

rge

neral

tonification/streng

then

ing)

Stem

s,leaves,

42.85

[75]

n.y.s.


Table

3Med

icinalplantsused

inethn

oped

iatricsin


tinued)

No.

Species

Family

Englishname

Romanian

name

Orig

inTradition

alindicatio

nsandtargeted

body

system

sPartsused

ERTV

(%)

References

fortradition

alindicatio

ns

Scientificeviden

cein

pediatric

clinicalstud

ies

turiţă

flowers

23.

Brassica

oleracea

L.Brassicaceae

Cabbage

Varză

Non

-native

1.Skin:W

ound

s,Im

petig

o(ash

ofbu

rnt

cob)

2.Gen

eral:M

easles

Leaves

28.57

[84,86]

n.y.s.

24.

Butomus

umbellatusL.

Butomaceae

Flow

eringrush

Crin

debaltă,

roşăţea

Native

1.Neurological:Con

vulsions,Epilepsy

(ext-bath)

Aerial

parts

14.28

[75]

n.y.s.

25.

Calend

ula

officinalisL.

Asteraceae

Com

mon

marigold

Filim

ină,

Gălbine

leNative

1.Psycho

logical:Insomnia(ext-bath)

Flow

ers

14.28

[75]

p.e.*↓severityof

diaper

derm

atitis

[105–107];p.e.*↓clinicalsign

sof

chronic

blep

haritisanddryeyesynd

rome(Note.

Mixed

grou

pof

subjects-adu

ltsandchil

dren

[108];

26.

Cann

abissativa

L.Cannabaceae

Hem

pCânep

ăNative

1.Skin

(ext):Infections,Impe

tigo

Seed

s14.28

[74]

p.e.*ben

efits

inep

ilepsy[109];p.e.*m

otor

disorders

(improved

spasticity

anddyston

ia,sleep

disturbances,p

ainseverity)[110]

27.

Carduusnu

tans

L.Asteraceae

Muskthirstle

Scăiete,

Ciulin

Native

1.Gen

eral:W

eakness(fo

rge

neral

tonification/streng

then

ing)

Aerial

parts

14.28

[75]

n.y.s.

28.

Carlina

acaulis

L.Asteraceae

Silver

thirstle

Ciurul

zâne

lor,sita

ielelor

Native

1.Neurological:Epilepsy(ext-bath,int);2.

Psycho

logical:Fright

(ext-fu

migations)

Flow

ers

28.57

[84,86]

n.y.s.

29.

Carum

carviL.

Apiaceae

Caraw

ayChimen

Native

1.Digestive:Cramps,C

olic,D

iarrhe

a,Flatulen

ceSeed

s14.28

[74,84]

n.y.s.

30.

Centaurium

erythraeaRafn

Gen

tianaceae

Europe

ancentaury

Ţintaură

Native

1.Gen

eral:W

eakness

2.Endo

crine/MetabolicandNutritional:

Ano

rexia(int-syrup)


Stem

s,leaves,

flowers

42.85

[75,84]

n.y.s.

31.

Ceratoceph

alus

falcatus

(L.)

Pers.#

Ranu

nculaceae

-Ploşnicar

Native

1.Skin

(ext):Infections

Aerial

parts

14.28

[75]

n.y.s.

32.

Chaeroph

yllum

arom

aticum

L.Apiaceae

-Anton

ică

Native

1.Digestive:Toothpain

2.Neurological:Headache

3.Psycho

logical:Psycho

sis

Leaves

42.85

[85]

n.y.s.

33.

Chelidon

ium

majus

L.Papaveraceae

Celandine

Rostop

ască

Native

1.Gen

eral(ro

ot,ext-bath

forge

neral

tonification/streng

then

ing)

Root

14.28

[75]

p.e.*chronictonsillitis(im

proved

cellular

andhu

moralim

mun

ity,non

specific

resistance,red

uced

thenu

mbe

rof

recurren

ces)[111]

34.

Cichorium

intybusL.

Asteraceae

Com

mom

chicory

Cicoare

Native


Leaves,

roots,

rhizom

e

14.28

[85,86]

p.e.*acutegastroen

teritis-related

diarrhea

(redu

ceddu

ratio

nof

acutediarrhea)

[112]

35.

Cirsium

arvense(L.)

Asteraceae

Creep

ing

thirstle

Pălămidă,

pălămidă

Native

1.Nutritional:Athrepsia(ext-bath)

Aerial

parts,

14.28

[74]

n.y.s.


Table

3Med

icinalplantsused

inethn

oped

iatricsin


tinued)

No.

Species

Family

Englishname

Romanian

name

Orig

inTradition

alindicatio

nsandtargeted

body

system

sPartsused

ERTV

(%)

References

fortradition

alindicatio

ns

Scientificeviden

cein

pediatric

clinicalstud

ies

Scop

.seacă

roots

36.

Cirsium

oleraceum

(L.)

Scop

.

Asteraceae

Cabbage

thirstle

Crăpu

şnic

Native

1.Gen

eral:for

gene

ralstren

gthe

ning

/tonification(ext-bath)

Roots,

stem

s14.28

[85]

n.y.s.

37.

Clem

atisvitalba

L.Ranu

nculaceae

Old

man’s

beard

Curpe

nNative

1.Gen

eral:W

eakness(ext)

Aerial

parts

14.28

[75,84,85]

n.y.s.

38.

Cochlearia

officinalisL.

Brassicaceae

Com

mom

scurvygrass

Ling

urea

Native

1.Gen

eral:Tub

erculosis

2.Digestive:Indige

stion/Dyspe

psia

3.Endo

crine,metabolic,nutritional:Lack

ofappe

tite

Leaves

42.85

[75]

n.y.s.

39.

Conium

maculatum

L.Apiaceae

Hem

lock

Cucută

Native

1.Skin

(ext):Dermatosis

2.Neurological:Paralysis(ext-bath)

Leaves

28.57

[75]

n.y.s.

40.

Consolida

regalis

Gray

Ranu

nculaceae

Forking

larkspur

Somno

roasă,

creasta

cucului

Native

1.Psycho

logical:insomnia(int-

decoction)

Flow

ers

14.28

[80]

n.y.s.

41.

Cornus

mas

L.Cornaceae

Europe

ancornel

Corn

Native

1.Digestive:Diarrhe

a2.Psycho

logical:Agitatio

nwith

scream

ing

3.Gen

eral:Typho

idfever

4.Nutritional:Und

erweigh

t

Fruits

57.14

[75,84–86]

p.e.*im

provem

entof

lipid

profile

and

vascular

inflammation[113]

42.

Corylus

avellana

L.Betulaceae

Com

mon

hazel

Alun

Native

1.Gen

eral:W

eakness(ext-bathfor

gene

ralton

ificatio

n/streng

hten

ing)

Leaves,

buds,

fruits,

male

flowers

14.28

[74,75]

n.y.s.

43.

Cucurbita

pepo

L.Cucurbitaceae

Pumpkin

Bostan

Non

-native

1.Endo

crine,metabolic,nutritional:

Und

erweigh

tPu

lp28.57

[75]

n.y.s.

44.

Daucuscarota

L.Apiaceae

Carrot

Morcov

Non

-native

1.Musculoskeletal:Rickets

2.Digestive:Stom

atitis

3.Skin:W

ound

s,Im

petig

o(ext)

Roots,

leaves,

seed

s

42.85

[75,84,86]

p.e.*gastroe

nteritis(stoolsreturningto

norm

alconsistencyandfre

quen

cyin

6days)[114]

45.

Dryopteris

filix-

mas

(L.)Scho

ttDryop

terid

aceae

Malefern

Ferig

ăNative

1.Digestive:Intestinalworms

2.Skin

(ext):Wou

nds

3.Neurological:Epilepsy;4.Endo

crine,

metabolicandnu

trition

al(ext-bath):

Delayed

grow

th5.Psycho

logical(ext):

insomnia

6.Musculoskeletal(ext):Rickets,Bo

nediseases,Bon

ede

form

ities

7.Bloo

dandlymph

node

s:Scroph

ulosis

(ext-cataplasm

+int-milk

decoction)

Rhizom

e,leaves

100

[75,84]

n.y.s.

46.

Equisetum

arvenseL.

Equisetaceae

Com

mon

horsetail

Coada

calului

Native

1.Digestive:Diarrhe

aSterile

aerial

28.57

[75]

n.y.s.


Table

3Med

icinalplantsused

inethn

oped

iatricsin


tinued)

No.

Species

Family

Englishname

Romanian

name

Orig

inTradition

alindicatio

nsandtargeted

body

system

sPartsused

ERTV

(%)

References

fortradition

alindicatio

ns

Scientificeviden

cein

pediatric

clinicalstud

ies

parts

47.

Equisetum

fluviatile

L.Equisetaceae

Water

horsetail

Pipirig

Native

1.Musculoskeletal:w

alking

difficulties

(bathforbo

nestreng

then

ing,

incombinatio

nwith

Jacobaea

erratica

(Bertol.)Fourr.))

Not

specified

(probably

aerial

parts)

14.28

[75,79]

n.y.s.

48.

Eryngium

plan

umL.

Apiaceae

Blue

eryngo

Scaivânăt,

spinul

albastru

Native

1.Endo


Und

erweigh

t2.Skin

(ext):Scalpfung

alinfections,

Impe

tigo,Eczema

3.Gen

eral:W

eakness(ext-bathfor

gene

ralton

ificatio

n/streng

then

ing)

4.Digestive:Colic(ext-bath)

5.Neurological:ep

ilepsy(ext-bath)

Roots

rhizom

e,flowers

71.42

[74,75,84,86

]n.y.s.

49.

FicuscaricaL.

Moraceae

Figtree

Smochin

Non

-native

1.Bloo

dandlymph

node

s:Scroph

ulosis

(ext-cataplasm

+int-milk

decoction)

Fruits

14.28

[84]

p.e.*atopicde

rmatitis(safety,efficacy,

tolerability,andsymptom

relief

considerablein

comparison

with

hydrocortison

e1.0%

)[115]

50.

Filipendula

ulmaria(L.)

Maxim

.

Rosaceae

Meadwort

Creţuşcă

Native

1.Gen

eral:W

eakness(ext-bathfor

gene

ralton

ificatio

n/streng

then

ing)

Aerial

parts

14.28

[75]

n.y.s.

51.

Foeniculum

vulgareMill.

Apiaceae

Fenn

elFenicul

Non

-native

1.Digestive:Intestinalcram

ps,Flatulence

Fruits

28.57

[75,84,86]

p.e.infantile

colic

(decreased

intensity

ofcolic,d

ecreased

averagedaily

crying

time[116])

52.

Fraxinus

ornu

sL.

Oleaceae

South

Europe

anfloweringash

Mojdrean

Native

1.Digestive:Con

stipation

Sap

14.28

[75]

n.y.s.

53.

Galium

odoratum

(L.)

Scop

.

Rubiaceae

Sweetscented

bedstraw

,woo

druff

Sânziene

depădu

re,

vinariţă,

mum

apădu

rii

Native

1.Psycho

logical(ext-bath):Fright,

Bedw

ettin

g/Enuresis,W

eeping

durin

gsleep

2.Gen

eral:W

eakness(ext-bathfor

gene

ralstren

gthe

ning

)

Aerial

parts

28.57

[75,84,86]

n.y.s.

54.

Galium

interm

edium

Schu

lt.

Rubiaceae

-Samca,

sămcuţa,

cucută

depădu

re

Native

1.Neurological:ep

ilepsy(ext-bath,int-

smallamou

ntof

decoction)

Not

specified

(probably

aerial

parts)

14.28

[86]

n.y.s

55.

Galium

verum

L.Ru

biaceae

Lady’s

bedstraw

Sânziene

,drăgaică

Native

1.Gen

eral:A

sthe

nia,Weakness

Aerial

parts

14.28

[75,84]

n.y.s.

56.

Geran

ium

macrorrhizum

L.

Geraniaceae

Bigroo

tge

ranium

Priboi

Native


Aerial

parts,

leaves

14.28

[75]

n.y.s.


Table

3Med

icinalplantsused

inethn

oped

iatricsin


tinued)

No.

Species

Family

Englishname

Romanian

name

Orig

inTradition

alindicatio

nsandtargeted

body

system

sPartsused

ERTV

(%)

References

fortradition

alindicatio

ns

Scientificeviden

cein

pediatric

clinicalstud

ies

57.

Gratiola

officinalisL.

Plantaginaceae

Gratio

leVeninariţă,

avramească

Native

1.Skin:Eczem

a2.Nutritional:Ph

ysicalde

bility(ext.)

3.Gen

eral(fu

migations):ge

neral

streng

then

ingagainstdiseases

4.Psycho

logical(fumigations):Fright

durin

gsleep

5.Neurological(fumigations):Epilepsy,

Paralysis

6.Cardiovascular:Tahicardia

Aerial

parts

85.71

[75,85]

n.y.s.

58.

Helianthu

san

nuus

L.Asteraceae

Com

mon

sunflower

Floarea

soarelui

Non

-native

1.Digestive:Stom

achpain

Flow

ers,

Seed

soil

14.28

[81]

n.y.s.

59.

Heracleum

spho

ndylium

L.Apiaceae

Hog

weed

Brânca

ursului

Native

1.Psycho

logical(ext-de

coctionpo

ured

onthehe

ad):Fright

2.Neurological(ext-bath):Paralysis

(inability

towalk)

Leaves,

stem

s28.57

[75]

n.y.s.

60.

1.1.1.Elaeagnu

srham

noides

(L.)

A.N

elson

1.1.2.

Elaeagnaceae

Seabu

ckthorn

Cătinăalbă

Native

1.Gen

eral:W

eakness

Fruits

14.28

[11]

n.y.s.

61.

1.1.3.Hordeum

vulgareL.

1.1.4.Po

aceae

Barley

Ovăz

Non

-native

1.Gen

eral:W

eakness(ext-bath)

Seed

s14.28

[84]

n.y.s.

62.

Hum

ulus

lupulusL.

Cannabaceae

Com

mon

hop

Ham

eiNative

1.Skin:Infectio

ns,W

ound

s(ext-bath)

2.Nutritional:Ph

ysicalde

bility,

Und

erweigh

t(ext-bath)

Flow

ers,

leaves

28.57

[75,84,86]

n.y.s.

63.

Hyoscyamus

nigerL.

Solanaceae

Hen

bane

Măselariţă

Native

1.Psycho


Seed

s14.28

[75]

n.y.s.

64.

Hypericum

perfo

ratum

L.Hypericaceae

Perfo

rate

StJohn

’swort

Sunătoare,

pojarniţă

Native

1.Skin

(ext):Eczema,Wou

nds,Im

petig

o/Skin

infections,Burns

Aerial

parts

14.28

[75]

n.y.s.

65.

Impatiens

noli-

tang

ereL.

Balsam

inaceae

Touch-me-no

tbalsam

Slăbănog

Native

1.Gen

eral:w

eakness(ext-bathfor

gene

ralton

ificatio

n/streng

then

ing)

2.Musculoskeletal:D

isability/W

eakness

oftheextrem

ities

(ext-bathforbo

nestreng

then

ing)

Aerial

parts

28.57

[75,84,86]

n.y.s.

66.

Inulahelenium

L.Asteraceae

Elecam

pane

Iarbămare

Native

1.Psycho

logical:Weeping

durin

gnigh

t(ext-fu

migation)

2.Neurological:ep

ilepsy(ext-polyherbal

ointmen

t,in

combinatio

nwith

lovage

,garlic,andothe

rplantswith

unresolved

botanicalide

ntity)

Root

28.57

[74,82,86]

n.y.s.

67.

Iris×

germ

anicaL.#

Iridaceae

Iris

Stânjene

lalbastru

Native

1.Digestive:Tootherup

tionpain

Rhizom

e14.28

[75]

n.y.s.

68.

Jacobaea

erratica(Bertol.)

Asteraceae

-Iarbacarelor

Native

1.Musculoskeletal:D

isability/w

eaknessof

theextrem

ities

(ext-bathforbo

neNot

specified

14.28

[75,79]

n.y.s.


Table

3Med

icinalplantsused

inethn

oped

iatricsin


tinued)

No.

Species

Family

Englishname

Romanian

name

Orig

inTradition

alindicatio

nsandtargeted

body

system

sPartsused

ERTV

(%)

References

fortradition

alindicatio

ns

Scientificeviden

cein

pediatric

clinicalstud

ies

Fourr.

streng

then

ing,

incombinatio

nwith

water

horsetail)

69.

Juglan

sregiaL.

Juglandaceae

Walnu

ttree

Nuc

Native

1.Gen

eral:W

eakness(intandext-

bath—forge

neralton

ificatio

n/streng

then

ing)

2.Skin

(ext):Eczema,Wou

nds,Skin

infections

(im

petig

o,scabies)

3.Digestive(int-teaof

shells):Diarrhe

a,Vo

miting

,Intestin

alpain,Stomatitis,

Intestinalparasites

4.Bloo

dandlymph

node

s:Scroph

ulosis

(ext-bathandint),ane

mia

5.Nutritional:un

derw

eigh

t(asfood

,in

combinatio

nwith

bread)

Seed

s,leaves,

youn

gseed

shells,

buds

71.42

[74,75,80,

84,86,88]

n.y.s.

70.

Laserpitium

prutenicum

L.Apiaceae

-Prussian

serm

ountain

Somno

roasă

Native

1.Psycho


2.Respiratory

(ext-bath):C

old,

Coryza

Flow

ery

stem

s28.57

[75]

n.y.s.

71.

Leon

urus

cardiaca

L.Lamiaceae

Mothe

rwort

Talpagâştei,

alion,

somnişor

Native

1.Psycho

logical:Insomnia(ext.b

ath).

Aerial

parts

14.28

[85]

n.y.s.

72.

Lepidium

ruderaleL.

Brassicaceae

Pepp

ergrass

Pădu

chelniţă,

buruiană

deroşte

Native

1.Skin:Scalp

eczema,ne

wbo

rnscalp

eczema

Aerial

parts

14.28

[75,80]

n.y.s.

73.

Levisticum

officinale

W.D.J.Ko

ch

Apiaceae

Lovage

Leuştean

Non

-native

1.Neurological:Epilepsy(ext-po

lyhe

rbal

ointmen

t,in

combinatio

nwith

Inula

helenium

L.,and

othe

rplantswith

unresolved

botanicalide

ntity)

Not

specified

(probably

Leaves

orRo

ot)

14.28

[86]

n.y.s.

74.

Ligustrum

vulgareL.

Oleaceae

Wild

privet

Lemncâinesc

Native

1.Skin:Scabies

Bark

14.28

[74]

n.y.s.

75.

Lina

riavulgaris

Mill.

Plantaginaceae

Com

mon

toadflax

Linariţă,colţu

llupu

lui

Native

1.Skin:Sub

cutane

oustumors(ext)

Aerial

parts

14.28

[74]

n.y.s.

76.

Linu

mhirsutum

L.Linaceae

Dow

nyflax

Inişo

rde

deal

Native

1.Digestive:Intestinalcolics

Not

specified

14.28

[75]

n.y.s.

77.

Lycium

barbarum

L.Solanaceae

Europe

ango

jiLiţio

n,cătin

ăde

garduri,

licia

Native

1.Psycho

logical(ext-bath):Fright/Anxiety

2.Neurological(ext-bath):Epilepsy,

Spam

s

Aerial

parts,

twigs,

leaves

28.57

[75,86]

n.y.s.

78.

Lycopodium

clavatum

L.Lycopo

diaceae

Com

mom

club

moss

Brădişo

r,pe

dicuţă,

coada-celor-

din-vânt

Native

1.Skin

(ext):Dermatitis,Eczema

Spores

14.28

[75,84]

n.y.s.

79.

Lysim

achia

Prim

ulaceae

Mon

eywort

Dreţe

Native

1.Gen

eral:W

eakness(ext-bathfor

Aerial

42.85

[75,79]

n.y.s.


Table

3Med

icinalplantsused

inethn

oped

iatricsin


tinued)

No.

Species

Family

Englishname

Romanian

name

Orig

inTradition

alindicatio

nsandtargeted

body

system

sPartsused

ERTV

(%)

References

fortradition

alindicatio

ns

Scientificeviden

cein

pediatric

clinicalstud

ies

nummulariaL.

gene

ralton

ificatio

n/streng

then

ing)

2.Endo


Growth

delay

3.Musculoskeletal:D

isability/W

eakness

oftheextrem

ities

(ext-bathforbo

nestreng

then

ing)

parts

80.

Lythrum

salicariaL.

Lythraceae

Purple

loosestrife

Răchitan

Native

1.Endo


unde

rweigh

t(ext-bath)

2.Psycho

logical:Insomnia(int)

3.Bloo

dandlymph

node

s:anem

ia(int)

Aerial

parts

42.85

[75]

n.y.s.

81.

Malva

sylvestris

L.Malvaceae

Com

mon

mallow

Nalbă

depădu

reNative

1.Skin:Impe

tigo

2.Respiratory:Ton

sillitis,D

iphthe

rictonsillitis(intandext),cou

gh

Leaves,

Flow

ers

28.57

[74,86]

n.y.s.

82.

Matricaria

cham

omillaL.

Asteraceae

Chamom

ille

Museţel,

Romaniță

Native

1.Digestive(int):A

bdom

inalcram

ps/

pains,cram

psin

newbo

rnsdu

eto

accumulationof

gas

2.Respiratory

(int):cold

3.Skin

(ext):Wou

nds,Im

petig

o4.Gen

eral:p

ain(unspe

cified),b

athfor

gene

ralstren

gthe

ning

ofne

wbo

rns,tea

forinternalpu

rification(int)

5.Neurological:Epilepsy(int)

Flow

ers

71.42

[9,74,75,86]

p.e.infantile

colic

(significantly

more

effectivethan

simethicone

[117],

decreasedaveragedaily

crying

time

[116])

83.

Melissa

officinalisL.

Lamiaceae

Lemon

balm

Roiniţă,

matocină

Native


Leaves

REVIEW Open Access Historical ethnobotanical review of … · 2020. 3. 24. · REVIEW Open Access...

Documents

Transcript of REVIEW Open Access Historical ethnobotanical review of … · 2020. 3. 24. · REVIEW Open Access...