Vortrag M. Walkenhorst Teil 1 2014-1 - Schaette
Transcrição
Vortrag M. Walkenhorst Teil 1 2014-1 - Schaette
Original Article · Originalarbeit Forsch Komplementmed 2012;19:125–136 DOI: 10.1159/000339336 Published online: June 20, 2012 Traditional Use of Herbal Remedies in Livestock by Farmers in 3 Swiss Cantons (Aargau, Zurich, Schaffhausen) Kathrin Schmida Silvia Ivemeyerb Christian Voglc Franziska Klarerd Beat Meierd Matthias Hamburgera Michael Walkenhorstb a Institute of Pharmacentical Biology, Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Basel, Research Group ‘Animal Health Division’, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, Frick, Switzerland c Division of Organic Farming, Department of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria d Unit of Phytopharmacy, Institute of Biotechnology, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Wädenswil, Switzerland b Keywords Ethnoveterinary medicine · Medicinal plants · Organic agriculture · Switzerland · Aargau, Zurich, Schaffhausen Schlüsselwörter Ethnoveterinärmedizin · Arzneipflanzen · Biologischer Landbau · Schweiz · Aargau, Zürich, Schaffhausen Summary Background: This study investigated the extent of traditional knowledge and use of homemade herbal remedies for livestock by farmers in 3 Swiss cantons (Aargau, Zurich, Schaffhausen). The study focused on organic farms. Methods: At 21 farms, 24 farmers aged 36–83 years were interviewed with a semi-structured, detailed questionnaire. For each homemade herbal remedy, the plant species, mode of preparation, source of knowledge, and application were gathered. Satisfaction of the farmers with the application was estimated with the aid of a visual analogue scale. Results: Information on a total of 165 homemade remedies was collected of which 123 contained a single plant species only (homemade mono-species herbal remedies, HMHR). The 123 HMHR were selected for this paper. They corresponded to 150 different applications and originated from 43 plant species from 30 families. Plants belonging to the families of Asteraceae, Lamiaceae, and Apiaceae were used most frequently. The single most applied species were Matricaria recutita L., Calendula officinalis L., Symphytum officinale L., and Coffea arabica L. For each formulation, 1–4 different applications were mentioned, most of them for cattle. The main applications are related to a) skin alterations and sores, b) gastrointestinal and metabolic diseases as well as c) infertility and diseases of the female genitalia. Approximately half of the applications were used during the last 12 months prior to the interview. Conclusion: This study shows that HMHR are used by Swiss farmers for the treatment of different livestock diseases. In general, the farmers were satisfied with the outcome of the applications. Zusammenfassung Hintergrund: Diese Studie untersucht, inwieweit traditionelles Erfahrungswissen über Arzneipflanzenanwendungen beim Nutztier auf landwirtschaftlichen Betrieben dreier Schweizer Kantone (Aargau, Zürich, Schaffhausen) vorhanden ist und angewendet wird. Im Studienfokus lagen Biobetriebe. Methoden: In 21 Betrieben wurden 24 Landwirtinnen und Landwirte im Alter von 36 bis 83 Jahren anhand eines semistrukturierten, detaillierten Fragenkatalogs befragt. Für jede genannte Rezeptur wurden Informationen zu Pflanze, Herstellungsprozess, Wissensursprung und Anwendung dokumentiert. Ihre Zufriedenheit mit der Wirkung bewerteten die Landwirtinnen und Landwirte anhand einer visuellen Analogskala (VAS). Ergebnisse: Insgesamt wurden 165 Rezepturen erfasst. Davon enthielten 123 Rezepturen als Bestandteil je eine einzelne Pflanzenart. Nur diese 123 Rezepturen und ihre insgesamt 150 Anwendungen wurden näher betrachtet. Insgesamt 43 Pflanzenarten aus 30 Familien kamen zum Einsatz. Die Pflanzenfamilien Asteracae, Lamiaceae und Apiaceae waren am häufigsten in den Rezepturen vertreten. Die Pflanzenarten Matricaria recutita L., Calendula officinalis L., Symphytum officinale L. und Coffea arabica L. wurden am häufigsten angewendet. Für jede Rezeptur wurden bis zu 4 verschiedene Anwendungen, überwiegend für Rinder, beschrieben. Die häufigsten Anwendungsgebiete waren a) Hautveränderungen und Wunden, b) Erkrankungen des Magen-Darm-Trakts und Stoffwechselstörungen sowie c) Fruchtbarkeitsstörungen und Erkrankungen der weiblichen Genitale. Rund die Hälfte der Rezepturen wurde während der letzten 12 Monate vor dem Erhebungsdatum angewendet. Basierend auf der Auswertung der VAS zeigten sich die Landwirtinnen und Landwirte mit dem Ergebnis der Anwendung zufrieden. Schlussfolgerung: Diese Studie zeigt, dass pflanzliche Rezepturen von Schweizer Landwirtinnen und Landwirten zur Behandlung ihrer Nutztiere mit großer Zufriedenheit eingesetzt werden. © 2012 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg 1661-4119/12/0193-0125$38.00/0 Fax +49 761 4 52 07 14 [email protected] www.karger.com Accessible online at: www.karger.com/fok Michael Walkenhorst Forschungsinstitut für Biologischen Landbau Ackerstrasse, Postfach, 5070 Frick, Switzerland Tel. +41 62 865 72-86, Fax -73 [email protected] Introduction Methods Ethnoveterinary research is defined as ‘the systematic investigation and application of folk veterinary knowledge, theory and practice’ [1]. The World Health Organisation defines the use of traditional medicine as ‘the sum total of knowledge, skills and practices based on the theories, beliefs and experiences indigenous to different cultures that are used to maintain health, as well as to prevent, diagnose, improve or treat physical and mental illnesses’ [2]. In former times, knowledge on medicinal plants was passed down from generation to generation. In modern societies such as those of Western Europe, traditional knowledge is in danger of disappearing [3]. Most ethnoveterinary surveys on the preparation and utilization of herbal remedies have been conducted in Africa, Asia, and Latin America [4]. In these countries, access to conventional drugs is more difficult, and they are hence dependent on the use of homemade preparations [5]. Nonetheless, in Europe, particularly in Mediterranean regions and in specific areas of Austria, surveys on the usage of traditional medicinal plants to treat livestock have been conducted [6–15]. However, in Switzerland, no comparative surveys regarding the use of homemade herbal remedies by Swiss farmers have been carried out, except for 1 survey in Safiental, a region of the Canton Graubünden with approximately 1,000 inhabitants [16]. The European Council Regulations on Organic Farming (nos. 834/2007 and 889/2008) and the Swiss Regulation of Organic Agriculture require a preference to veterinary complementary medicine, such as the use of phytotherapeutic products, for the treatment of livestock diseases. Chemically synthesized allopathic veterinary medicinal products including antibiotics should only be used under strict conditions [17, 18]. However, the required treatment of certain animal species with veterinary complementary medicines is hampered by for example the limited number of such substances commercially available and registered in the Swiss ‘Tierarzneimittelkompendium’ (veterinary formulary) [19]. Therefore, organic farmers in particular use homemade herbal remedies to treat their animals, which are often based on traditional formulations handed down over generations. There is an increasing consumers’ demand for high-quality animal food products with no or limited use of pharmaceuticals produced on a chemical or biotechnological basis [4]. The aim of this paper is to analyze the current knowledge and usage of medicinal plants by farmers in the 3 Swiss cantons of Aargau, Zurich, and Schaffhausen with the main focus on organic farms. We want to compare our results with ethnoveterinary literature from Europe to differentiate between regional specialities and supraregional equalities, as well as with the pharmacological literature, gaining a first impression of the potential efficacy of homemade herbal remedies. Study Region The survey was conducted in 3 of 26 Swiss cantons, namely Aargau, Zurich, and Schaffhausen. The 3 contiguous cantons have a common border to Germany in the north and are situated between 8°04‘–8°65‘E and 47°34’–47°71’N. They cover an area of 3,431 km2 with a total population of 2.1 million. The altitude varies between 330 and 1,292 m above sea level. The average annual temperature is 8.6 °C, and annual precipitation averages 1,021 mm. In 2009, there were a total of 8,567 farms in the 3 cantons. In Zurich 318 out of 4,028 (8%), in Aargau 204 out of 3,864 (5.5%), and in Schaffhausen 20 out of 675 (3%) were organic farms. Of the 542 organic farms, 410 kept cattle (75.6%) and 55 kept pigs (10.1%) [20]. 126 Forsch Komplementmed 2012;19:125–136 Farm Sampling Method All organic farmers of the 3 cantons were invited by letter to participate in the project. 7 farmers responded spontaneously. The 40 farmers from Aargau, Zurich, and Schaffhausen of the Organic Dairy Farm Research Network (ODRN; Research Institute of Organic Agriculture) as well as the 14 members (2010) of the Workgroups of Complementary Medicine in Zurich and Schaffhausen (WGCM) were contacted and invited by telephone, which lead to 9 participants. A further 5 dialog partners could be found with the snowball sampling method [21] through reactions to the letter or information provided by farmers of the ODNR and WGCM. All dialog partners met the following criteria: 1) naming of at least 3 homemade herbal remedies during the first contact via telephone; 2) willingness to talk about their knowledge and to communicate it to a third party; 3) inclusion of respondents irrespective of farm type (organic or integrated production), or sex and age of the interviewee. Farms and Farmers A total of 21 interviews with 24 farmers were carried out. At 3 farms, couples were interviewed together upon request of the respondents, and the answers per couple were merged into 1 interview. The interview sample comprised 12 women and 12 men between the age of 36 and 83 years (53 ± 13 years) from 17 organic farms and 4 farms with integrated production. 12 interviews were held in canton Aargau, 8 in Zurich, and 1 in Schaffhausen. There were a total of 20 cattle farms of which 13 were dairy farms and 7 suckler cow husbandries. 1 horse range was included. In addition, 12 of the farms had laying hens, 6 had pigs, 5 had horses and sheep, and 2 grew broilers. The dairy farms had between 10 and 120 cattle. The smallest suckler cow husbandry had just 1, and the biggest 50 cattle. The agricultural production land, together with the rotation farming area, was between 5 and 138 ha. Interview Structure At the beginning of the interview, the respondents were asked to give written consent for the recording of the subsequent dialogue (recorded with OLYMPUS WS 200S Digital Voice Recorder, Olympus Imaging Europa GmbH, Dortmund, Germany). The recordings were not transcribed but served as a backup source in the case of uncertainties in the data analysis of each interview. The interviews were structured into 3 parts: 1) general information about the farm; 2) semi-structured conversation-guide based on different verbalizations of 7 ‘free listing’ questions [21, 22]; and 3) questionnaire to get differentiated information about the specific homemade herbal remedies and their application and administration. An entire interview took between 1.5 and 3.5 h. The aim of the ‘free listing’ part was to generate an informal and pleasant atmosphere for the farmers where they could talk freely. Furthermore, this part was done to obtain first information about medicinal plants and formulations known by the farmers. The first 2 parts together usually took 30–60 min. The third part of the interview was a questionnaire about farm-specific homemade remedies with 1 or more applications as Schmid/Ivemeyer/Vogl/Klarer/Meier/ Hamburger/Walkenhorst applied by the farmers, containing either pre-coded or free answer possibilities. All data was subsequently entered into a Microsoft Access database [23]. Remedies and Applications The German name of the plant was asked and, if necessary, pictures or books were used to define the botanical name. Information on the manufacturing process of the homemade herbal remedies was gathered, including the extraction process and the type of ointment. The manufacturing processes were not witnessed personally. The application of every remedy was asked. The respondent could give a free answer which was coded in categories of use. Route and frequency of administration and duration of the therapy were further registered issues. Daily dosages of oral administrations were determined by weighing the medicinal plants on site. If this was not possible, the weight of daily dosages was estimated by assessment of the administered volume of a herb and subsequent weighing, or by personal assessments by the farmers. The daily dosage was calculated for all medicinal plants for which more than 2 applications for oral administration were reported. To achieve a common basis for comparison between different species including humans, daily dosages were normalized by taking into account the different weight of the species by conversion of all dosages in dosage per kilogram metabolic body weight (MBW = body weight0.75) [24] according to the following formula: daily dose per administration (g) × repetition per day (kgg ) = drug dose metabolic body weight (kg ) 0,75 0,75 MBW was calculated with the following live weight: an adult cow or horse with 650 kg (MBW = 128.7 kg0.75), a calf with 75 kg (MBW = 25.5 kg0.75), a young pig with 15 kg (MBW = 7.6 kg0.75), a hen with 1 kg (MBW = 1 kg0.75), and a human with 65 kg (MBW = 22.9 kg0.75). If the respondents used the same daily oral dosage for calves and adult cattle, values for both age brackets were calculated. The sources of knowledge for homemade herbal remedies were gathered as well as the frequency of use and the date of the last use. Satisfaction with each application of homemade herbal remedies was assessed with a visual analogue scale (VAS) as a practical, reliable, and valid measurement [25]. In this study, this refers always to the farmer who mentioned the formulation with the corresponding application, and was estimated by the farmer when a homemade herbal remedy had been used twice or more. Respondents could decide on a scale of 100 mm between the endpoints ‘no effect’ (0 mm) and ‘very good effect’ (100 mm). For each category of use, the arithmetic mean and standard error of the VAS values were determined. Results In total, 165 homemade remedies were mentioned and described by the interview partners. This number includes 123 homemade mono-species herbal remedies (HMHR) with only 1 plant species each with or without extraction, 11 homemade composed herbal remedies with a maximum of 12 plant species, and 31 homemade remedies without plant species but containing 1 or more natural products such as curds, honey, vinegar, salt, or cod liver oil. The interview partners characterized between 2 and 14 homemade remedies per farm (mean 7.9 ± 3.2) and mentioned between 1 and 4 different applications for each homemade remedy (mean 1.2 ± 0.5). The homemade herbal remedies included a total of 65 plant species belonging to 42 families. Homemade Herbal Remedies for Swiss Livestock Ingredients and Formulation of 123 HMHR In this paper, we present only the 123 HMHR which included a total of 43 plant species belonging to 30 families and were used to treat cattle, horses, sheep, goats, pigs, hens, and cats. The 3 plant families mentioned in most HMHR were Asteraceae (27, 22.0%), Lamiaceae (13, 10.7%), and Apiaceae (10, 8.1%) (table 1). The most widely used plant species was Matricaria recutita L. used in 14 of the 123 HMHR (11.4%), followed by Calendula officinalis L., Symphytum officinale L., and Coffea arabica L. (each with 9 HMHR, 7.3%) (table 1). Different plant parts were used in the HMHR with seeds and fruit being the most common category (33 HMHR, 26.8%), followed by flowers, whole plants without roots (herb), leaves, roots, and twigs. Dried herbals drugs were used in 48.8% of the HMHR, while fresh plants were either administered directly or further processed in 43.1% of the HMHR. 6 commercial products were used in 10 HMHR (8.1%): Kamillosan® (MEDA Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Bad Homburg, Germany), WELEDA Arnica Tincture® (Weleda AG, Arlesheim, Switzerland), WELEDA Calendula Tincture® (Weleda), thyme oil, eucalyptus oil, and NJP Liniment® (Casa Verde Naturprodukte Vertriebs GmbH, Dortmund, Germany; including oil of Mentha arvensis L. var. piperascens). Besides the 6 directly used commercial products (4.8%), in 35 HMHR (28.5%) fresh or dried plant parts were directly used without further formulation or extraction. As solvent for extraction, water was used in 52 HMHR (42.3%), mainly for external or oral administration. These aqueous extractions were mainly (45 HMHR) infusions, and in 7 HMHR decoctions. Extraction with alcohol (schnapps) at room temperature was used in 14 HMHR (11.4%). The used schnapps contained between 40 and 90% ethanol. Further extraction with oil or fat at room temperature was reported in 8 HMHR (6.5%), and extraction with lipids at elevated temperature was described in 7 HMHR (5.7%). 1 HMHR was extracted with cider vinegar (0.8%) (table 1). A total of 12 ointments were prepared from 5 fresh or dried medicinal plant species. Beeswax was used as ointment base in 8 cases, whereas in 4 formulations the ointment base served directly as extractant. Applications of the 123 HMHR A total of 150 applications were named for the 123 HMHR. The main areas of application were 1) skin alteration and sores, 2) gastrointestinal diseases and metabolic dysfunction, 3) infertility and diseases of the female genitalia, 4) mastitis, 5) internal injuries, and 6) respiratory tract diseases (table 2). The most frequently named plant for the treatment of skin alterations and sores was Matricaria recutita L. (18 applications), followed by Calendula officinalis L. (9 applications) and Rhamnus catharticus L. (7 applications). For the treatment of gastrointestinal diseases and metabolic dysfunc- Forsch Komplementmed 2012;19:125–136 127 128 Table 1. Extraction procedures employed on 21 farms to prepare 123 HMHR used for 150 applications in 3 Swiss cantons (Aargau, Zurich, Schaffhausen) and routes of administration Botanic family (plant species for that family) Plant species with ≥ 3 named HMHR (remedies) Mentioned on-farm extraction procedures, frequency of mentioned 123 HMHR Routes of administration, frequency of mentioned 150 applications none external water Forsch Komplementmed 2012;19:125–136 infusion Asteraceae (5) Lamiaceae (6) Apiaceae (3) Schmid/Ivemeyer/Vogl/Klarer/Meier/ Hamburger/Walkenhorst Malvaceae (2) Boraginaceae (1) all Matricaria recutita L. (14) Matricariae flos (13) Matricariae herba (1) Calendula officinalis L. (9) Calendulae flos (7) Calendulae herba (2) othera (4) all Thymus vulgaris L. (6) Thymi herba (4) Thymi folium (2) Lavendula angustifolia Mill. (3) Lavendulae flos (3) otherb (4) 6 11 4f 9 oil/fat room temperature room temperature heated up 2 4 4 intact skin 3 internal altered or sore skin inhalation 1 2 1g 1h 1 1 2 5 5 2 2i 2 2 9 18f 5 1 3 all (4) Malva sylvestris L. (3) Malvae folium (1) Malvae herba (2) Otherd (1) 7 1g 1 3 2 1 1 1j 1 9 1 4 1 intrauterine treatment of housing environment 1 2 3h 1i 2l j 4 oral 26 1 all Carum carvi L. (5) Carvi fructus (5) Foeniculum vulgare Mill. (4) Foeniculi fructus (4) otherc (1) Symphytum officinale L. (9) Symphyti folium (3) Symphyti radix (6) decoction alcohol 2 6 1i 1 2 1 1 2 3 1 1 9 5 4 1 1 4 1 2 2 2 1 1 3 4 2 1 7 1 1 Table 1 continued on next page. Homemade Herbal Remedies for Swiss Livestock Table 1. Continued Botanic family (plant species for that family) Plant species with ≥ 3 named HMHR (remedies) Mentioned on-farm extraction procedures, frequency of mentioned 123 HMHR Routes of administration, frequency of mentioned 150 applications none external water infusion Rubiaceae (1) Rhamnaceae (1) Linaceae (1) Hypericaceae (1) Cupressaceae (1) Forsch Komplementmed 2012;19:125–136 Pinaceae (1) Coffea arabica L. (9) Coffeae semen (9) 1 Rhamnus catharticus L. (6) Rhamni herba (6) 6 Linum usitatissimum L. (6) Lini semen (6) 1 Urticaceae (1) Brassicaceae (1) Other (16) Total (43) oil/fat room temperature room temperature 1 2 4 2 1 intrauterine 2 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 oral 6 1 Urtica dioica L. (3) Urticae herba (3) 2 1 3 1 5 3 16 other plant species (17) inhalation 1 1 3 e altered or sore skin 2 Solanum tuberosum L. (3) Solani radix (3) Brassica napus L. (3) Rapae oleum (3) intact skin treatment of housing environment 9 3 1 Thuja occidentalis L. (3) Thujae occidentalis herba (3) Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. (3) Piceae herba (2) Piceae resina (1) heated up internal 8 Hypericum perforatum L. (4) Hyperici flos (3) Hyperici herba (1) Polygonaceae (1) Rumex obtusifolius L. (3) Rumicis folium (1) Rumicis semen (1) Rumicis radix cum herba (1) Solanaceae (1) decoction alcohol 1 k 8 5 41 45 7 3 1 15 8 7 1 4 4 25 44 1 1 k 13 2 68 3 Table 1 continued on next page. 129 Arnica montana L., Artemisia absinthium L., Taraxacum officinale Web. ex. Wigg. Oreganum majorana L., Mentha arvensis L. var. piperascens, Origanum vulgare L., Salvia officinalis L. c Sanicula europaea L. d Tilia cordata Mill. e Allium cepa L. (Amaryllidaceae), Humulus lupulus L. (Cannabaceae), Quercus robur L.(Fagaceae), Geranium robertianum L. (Geraniaceae), Jugulans regia L. ( Juglandaceae), Myristica Fragans Houtt. (Myristicaceae), Eucalyptus globolus Labill. (Myrtaceae), Chelidonium majus L. (Papaveraceae), Plantago lanceolata L. (Plantaginaceae), Avena sativa L. (Poaceae), Filipendula ulmaria (L.) Maxim (Rosaceae), Euphrasia officinalis L. (Scrophulariaceae), Camelia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze (Theaceae), Tropaeolum majus L. (Tropaeolaceae), Vitis vinifera L. (Vitaceae), Aloe vera (L.) Burm.f. (Xanthorrhoeaceae). f Kamillosan Liquidum used in 4 remedies for 9 applications. g Weleda Calendula Tincture used in 1 remedy for 1 application. h Weleda Arnica Tincture used in 1 remedy for 1 application. i Thyme oil used in 2 remedies for 1 application each. j NPJ Liniment (containing Mentha arvensis L. var. piperascens) used in 1 remedy for 1 application. k Eucalyptus oil used in 1 remedy for 1 application. l 1 extraction with cider vinegar. b a inhalation room temperature room temperature infusion decoction alcohol water oil/fat heated up intact skin altered or sore skin internal oral intrauterine external none treatment of housing environment Routes of administration, frequency of mentioned 150 applications Mentioned on-farm extraction procedures, frequency of mentioned 123 HMHR Plant species with ≥ 3 named HMHR (remedies) Botanic family (plant species for that family) Table 1. Continued 130 tions, Matricaria recutita L. (6 applications) and Coffea arabica L. (8 applications, 6 times in addition to schnapps) were used. For treatment of infertility, the farmers most often used Thuja occidentalis L. (3 applications). The HMHR were mostly used to treat cattle (118 applications, 78.7%), followed by horses (20 applications, 13.3%) and other animals (12 applications, 8.0%). Oral administration was most frequently used (68 applications, 45.3%) (table 1), e.g. for the treatment of diarrhea, stomach trouble, indigestion, cough, pneumonia, or uterine inflammation. For oral administration, the plant was often applied directly or as an extract made with water or alcohol. Orally administrated HMHR were either added to the feedstuff or applied by enforced administration. External administration on altered and sore skin, claws, hooves, and eyes was used in 44 applications (29.3%). For treatment of wounds, farmers used HMHR as baths, washes or compresses, or simply as a direct application of the oil or ointment to the lesion. For treatment of irritated eyes, the respondents used washouts with water extractions. Administration on intact skin was reported in 25 applications (16.7%) to treat internal injuries like pulled or hardened muscles, contusions, sprains, and swellings, or as repeller against ectoparasites. Usually, the farmers rubbed oil or ointment formulation on the affected body parts. 3 applications were intrauterine administrations, either to prevent inflammation or for cleaning the uterus after calving. 2 applications were used for inhalation (table 2). A special administration is linked to the use of Rhamnus catharticus L. to treat cattle ringworm. The twigs were not administered or applied onto the animals but were hung up in the stable for 8 weeks up to 1 year. In 4 applications, the farmers used Rhamnus catharticus L. therapeutically and in 3 applications prophylactically (table 2). The applications were used in 72 cases (48.0%) during the last 12 months and in 15 cases (10.0%) in the last few days preceding the interviews. The HMHR were used in pure form in most applications. 52 applications (34.7%) were used in combination with other homemade or homeopathic remedies. The use of 25 applications (16.7%) was, in the case of aggravation, combined with veterinary treatments, mainly for rehydration during diarrhea therapy. More than half of the applications were employed by the respondents more than 10 times (83 applications, 55.3%), 51 applications between 2 and 10 times (34.0%), and 16 applications less than 2 times (10.7%). The knowledge on the use of these applications was obtained from the forefathers (57 applications, 38.0%), books (29 applications, 19.3%), own experience (20 applications, 13.3%), friends (14 applications, 9.3%), and other sources such as newspapers (30 applications, 20.0%). With the help of a VAS, the degree of satisfaction with the 123 applications in which the HMHR were applied 2 or more times was evaluated for the pure use. Overall, the farmers were satisfied with the efficacy of their plant preparations (fig. 1). Forsch Komplementmed 2012;19:125–136 Schmid/Ivemeyer/Vogl/Klarer/Meier/ Hamburger/Walkenhorst Table 2. 150 applications (total) of 123 HMHR used on 21 farms in 3 Swiss cantons (Aargau, Zurich, Schaffhausen) Homemade Herbal Remedies for Swiss Livestock Plant species with ≥ 3 named HMHR (remedies) Categories of use All species of Asteraceae (27) Matricaria recutita L. (14) Matricariae flos (13) Matricariae herba (1) Calendula officinalis L. (9) Calendulae flos (7) Calendulae herba (2) Othera (4) 28 8 18h 5 1 All species of Lamiaceae (13) Thymus vulgaris L. (6) Thymi herba (4) Thymi folium (2) Lavendula angustifolia Mill.(3) Lavendulae flos (3) Otherb (4) Forsch Komplementmed 2012;19:125–136 All species of Apiaceae (10) Carum carvi L. (5) Carvi fructus (5) Foeniculum vulgare Mill. (4) Foeniculi fructus (4) Otherc (1) All species of Malvaceae (4) Malva sylvestris L. (3) Malvae folium (1) Malvae herba (2) Otherd (1) Symphytum officinale L. (9) Symphyti folium (3) Symphyti radix (6) skin alterations and sores Target animal species gastrointestinal and metabolic disorders 7 2i 1j 2 2 1 infertility and diseases of female genitals mastitis internal injuries respiratory tract diseases 2 28 2 1 1 7 1l 2 6 1i 5j 1 9 5 1 14 6 4 2 3 3 5 4k 2 1 1 3l 3 2 5 5 4 4 1 2 1 1 5 4 2 2 1 1 1 8 131 2 7a 38 24 23 1 9 7 2 5 10 5 5 4 4 1 1 Linum usitatissimum L. (6) Lini semen (6) 8 10 2 2 7 2 other Total different applications 9 1 Rhamnus catharticus L. (6) Rhamni herba (6) 2 3k 2 1 Coffea arabica L. (9) Coffeae semen (9) horse g 1 2 1 1 cattle 16h 1 1 other f 5 1 1 5 1 10 3 7 3 5 1 8 1 9 9 6 1 7 7 5 2 7 7 1 Table 2 continued on next page. Table 2. Continued 132 Plant species with ≥ 3 named HMHR (remedies) Forsch Komplementmed 2012;19:125–136 Hypericum perforatum L. (4) Hyperici flos (3) Hyperici herba (1) Categories of use skin alterations and sores Target animal species gastrointestinal and metabolic disorders Rumex obtusifolius L. (3) Rumicis folium (1) Rumicis semen (1) Rumicis radix cum herba (1) otherf 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 6 4 3 5 57 39 13 8 m 13 4 2 1 4 18 10 10 118 5 4 1 1 3 3 3 2 1 4 1 1 2 4 4 3 2 otherg 1 1 1 horse 1 1 1 1 1 1 cattle 3 1 2 1 16 other plant species (17) Total (123) respiratory tract diseases 1 e Schmid/Ivemeyer/Vogl/Klarer/Meier/ Hamburger/Walkenhorst a internal injuries 2 Solanum tuberosum L. (3) Solani radix (3) Urtica dioica L. (3) Urticae herba (3) Brassica napus L. (3) Rapae oleum (3) mastitis 2 Thuja occidentalis L. (3) Thujae occidentalis herba (3) Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. (3) Piceae herba (2) Piceae resina (1) infertility and diseases of female genitals Total different applications m 1 2 1 3 20 5 5 5 5 21 12 150 Arnica montana L., Artemisia absinthium L., Taraxacum officinale Web. ex. Wigg. Oreganum majorana L., Mentha arvensis L. var. piperascens, Origanum vulgare L., Salvia officinalis L. c Sanicula europaea L. d Tilia cordata Mill. e Allium cepa L. (Amaryllidaceae), Humulus lupulus L. (Cannabaceae), Quercus robur L.(Fagaceae), Geranium robertianum L. (Geraniaceae), Jugulans regia L. ( Juglandaceae), Myristica Fragans Houtt. (Myristicaceae), Eucalyptus globolus Labill. (Myrtaceae), Chelidonium majus L. (Papaveraceae), Plantago lanceolata L. (Plantaginaceae), Avena sativa L. (Poaceae), Filipendula ulmaria (L.) Maxim (Rosaceae), Euphrasia officinalis L. (Scrophulariaceae), Camelia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze (Theaceae), Tropaeolum majus L. (Tropaeolaceae), Vitis vinifera L. (Vitaceae), Aloe vera (L.) Burm.f. (Xanthorrhoeaceae). f Parasites and general strengthening. g Goats, sheep, pigs, cats. h Kamillosan Liquidum used in 4 remedies for 9 applications. i Weleda Calendula Tincture used in 1 remedy for 1 application. j Weleda Arnica Tincture used in 1 remedy for 1 application. k Thyme oil used in 2 remedies for 1 application each. l NPJ Liniment (containing Mentha arvensis L. var. piperascens) used in 1 remedy for 1 application. m Eucalyptus oil used in 1 remedy for 1 application. b Homemade Herbal Remedies for Swiss Livestock Table 3. Daily dosage in plant equivalent per kg metabolic body weight (g/kg0.75) of HMHR used for oral administration on 21 farms in 3 Swiss cantons (Aargau, Zurich, Schaffhausen) Plant species with ≥ 3 HMHR with an ascertainable oral daily dose Matricaria recutita L. Matricariae flos Matricariae herba Daily dose, g/kg0.75 calf (75 kg) cow (650 kg) 0.12, 0.16, 0.35, 0.47, 0.63 0.03 0.004 Thymus vulgaris L. Thymi herba Thymi folium 0.39, 11.77 0.08 Carum carvi L. Carvi fructus 0.24, 0.63, 0.75, 2.35, 3.77 0.05, 0.14 Foeniculum vulgare Mill. Foeniculi fructus 0.11, 0.18, 0.31, 0.50 0.1 Coffea arabica L. Coffeae semen Forsch Komplementmed 2012;19:125–136 Linum usitatissimum L. Lini semen 0.05, 0.11, 0.14, 0.18, 0.21, 0.72, 1.11 1.90, 2.00, 2.24, 7.85 0.40 Thuja occidentalis L. Thujae occidentalis herba 0,006, 0.006, 0.02 Solanum tuberosum L. Solani radix 7.77, 7.77, 38.84 Urtica dioica L. Urticae herba a Hens and pigs. Calves. c Cattle. d Horses. e Hens. f Pigs. g Ponepal et al. [36]; calves: subcutaneous injections. n.a. = Not applicable. b foal (75 kg) 4.66 0.67 horse (650 kg) other a Arithmetic mean and standard deviation Converted animal dose, g/kg0.75 [27] Converted humane daily dose, g/kg0.75 [28] 0.22 ± 0.24 0.2–0.4 0.4–0.5 2.47 ± 5.20 0.08–0.4 0.1–0.3 1.13 ± 1.40 0.2–0.4 0.07–0.3 0.24 ± 0.17 0.2–0.4 0.2–0.3 0.37 ± 0.37 0.05g n.a. 2.92 ± 2.82 1.0–2.0b, 0.4–1.6c, 0.4–0.8d 0.70 0.01 ± 0.009 n.a. n.a. 18.12 ± 17.94 n.a. n.a. 2.39 ± 2.66 0.2–0.4c, 0.1–0.3d, 3.0–10.0e, 1.3–2.6f 0.4–0.7 0.0009 0.13 0.62 0.16 e 0.002 , 4.72f 133 bica L. In Austria as well as in Swiss Safiental, Arnica montana L. was more often used than in our study. This may be ascribed to the fact that these surveys focused on the alpine regions where Arnica grows naturally and thus is known better to local farmers [6, 9, 11, 16]. In Austria and Switzerland, the most widely used herbal drugs were employed for similar indications. In our survey, we recorded more frequent usage of fruits from the family of Apiaceae, such as cumin and caraway, for treating gastrointestinal disorders than reported in the Austrian studies [6, 9, 11–13]. The 8 most relevant medicinal plants which were used for more than 4 homemade herbal remedies each are briefly discussed in the following with a focus on categories of use and dosage in the case of orally administrated applications. Fig. 1. Degree of satisfaction of farmers with the outcome of the 123 applications used twice or more, as estimated on a 100 mm VAS (arithmetic mean and standard error; numbers in brackets indicate the frequency with which application was mentioned). Discussion The present study was the first survey on the knowledge and use of homemade herbal remedies by farmers in the Northern part of Switzerland. Organic farms were chosen as focus group because we supposed that these farms may need to be knowledgeable about herbal remedies which is the required treatment method according to the Swiss Organic Regulation [18]. The farms producing according to integrated production, which were obtained by the snowball sampling method, [21] also feature traditional knowledge although the results cannot be considered as representative. However, the chosen sampling method is common in studies gathering information on traditional knowledge [6, 9, 11–13, 16]. The farmers used homemade herbal remedies as first measure to treat mild or moderate diseases. The dosages assessed in the interviews have to be considered as approximations. However, this enabled us to compare them with dose recommendations in the literature (table 3). Such comparisons have not been reported in similar surveys from other European countries [9–16]. The range of reported dosages was wide. This may be explained by the high therapeutic index of most herbal drugs. The success estimations on VAS by the interviewed farmers was certainly subjective, but was a general indicator for their degree of satisfaction with the results of their treatments. The majority of documented applications were for cattle. This can be attributed to the fact that 95% of the participating farms kept dairy or suckler cows. In the organic farms of the investigated area, cattle were the most important farm animal species [20]. In the 3 investigated cantons, as well as in different Austrian regions and in Swiss Safiental, the farmers most frequently used Matricaria recutita L., Calendula officinalis L., and Coffea ara- 134 Forsch Komplementmed 2012;19:125–136 Chamomile Flowerheads (Matricaria recutita L., Matricariae flos) Chamomile was administered internally and externally and used to treat gastrointestinal diseases and skin alterations and sores. These findings are in line with ethnoveterinary studies in Swiss Safiental, Austria, and Western Spain [6, 7, 9, 11–13, 16]. However, use of chamomile was not documented in surveys in Catalonia and Tuscany [8, 26]. The treatment of gastrointestinal disorders, metabolic dysfunctions, and skin alterations and sores is also described in veterinary medicine [27], and is supported by in vitro and in vivo pharmacological studies on major constituents [28] and chamomile extracts [29, 30]. Dosages described for oral administration were, on average, comparable to recommendations for veterinary use [27], and in the range of human doses (table 3) [28]. Kamillosan was the only commercial chamomile product that was used as ingredient in several formulations. It is also used by the Department for Livestock of the Veterinary Clinic Zurich for the treatment of sores and in inhalations against pneumonia (table 3) (Prof. Dr. Ueli Braun, Zurich, Personal Communication) . Thyme (Thymus vulgaris L., Thymi herba) Thyme was used by the interviewed farmers to treat ailments of the respiratory tract, gastrointestinal disorders, and metabolic dysfunctions. Farmers in Catalonia use a herbal tea from thyme for treating diarrhoea in calves [8] whereas in Swiss Safiental it is mainly used to treat respiratory tract diseases and to prepare udder ointments [16]. In contrast, no use of thyme has been documented in Austria [6, 9, 11, 13]. In veterinary medicine, thyme preparations are recommended for gastrointestinal diseases, metabolic dysfunctions, and respiratory tract disorders [27]. Thymol and carvacrol are the major constituents of the essential oil [28, 29]; the bronchodilating properties have been demonstrated with isolated tracheas of guinea pigs [31]. 2 of the 3 daily oral doses recorded in our survey were in the recommended range for oral administrations for humans and animals (table 3) [27, 28], 1 dosage was 20 times higher. Schmid/Ivemeyer/Vogl/Klarer/Meier/ Hamburger/Walkenhorst Linseed (Linum usitatissimum L., Lini semen) Linseed was administered orally for gastrointestinal disorders, as reported also from Austria and Italy [6, 9, 11, 26]. In addition, farmers in our study used linseed as a poultice for internal injuries. Similar use has been documented in several regions of Austria [9, 13]. Linseed contains mucilaginous polysaccharides which produce a protective and soothing layer on skin and mucous membranes. In veterinary medicine, linseed is used as a mild laxative given either as mucilage or as whole seeds [27]. The dosages administered by the interviewed farmers corresponded with the recommended dosage per kilogram MBW for animals and humans (table 3) [27, 28]. Caraway (Carum carvi L., Carvi fructus) Caraway was orally administered to treat gastrointestinal disorders and metabolic dysfunctions. No usage of caraway fruit has been documented in surveys conducted in Austria, Italy, and Spain [6–9, 11, 13] but some applications are documented for Swiss Safiental [16]. Veterinary medicine recommends caraway in disorders of the gastrointestinal tract [27]. The essential oil facilitates digestion and has antibacterial and antimycotic properties [32]. Extracts have been shown to exert a spasmolytic effect on smooth muscle cells of guinea pigs [33]. On average, the dosages used by the interviewed farmers were comparatively high (table 3) [27, 28]. Stinging Nettle Herb (Urtica dioica L., Urticae herba) Stinging nettle was administered as a restorative remedy and was the only herbal drug applied to treat 4 different animal species. In Tuscany, Catalonia, and Northwest Spain, as well as in Swiss Safiental, stinging nettle is reportedly used as restorative remedy and as an anti-inflammatory [7, 8, 26]. No usage of stinging nettle has been documented in Austria [6, 9, 11, 13]. In veterinary medicine, stinging nettle is recommended to increase urinary flow during bacterial and inflammatory diseases of the urinary tract, and as adjuvant treatment in rheumatic complaints. Stinging nettle herb shows mild antihypertensive, analgesic, local anaesthetic, antiphlogistic, antirheumatic, and diuretic properties [27, 28]. On average, the dosages reported by the farmers were higher for pigs and cattle and lower for hens than recommended in veterinary and human medicine; however, doses given to horses were comparable to recommended veterinary and human dosages (table 3). Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) The farmers brewed coffee to treat gastrointestinal disorders, metabolic dysfunctions, infertility, and diseases of the female genitalia. In 7 homemade herbal remedies they added schnapps to the coffee. In Austria and Swiss Safiental, the application of coffee, with or without schnapps, was documented for similar traditional uses [6, 9, 11, 16]. Coffee beans contain purine alkaloids, mainly caffeine, and theophylline as a minor Homemade Herbal Remedies for Swiss Livestock by-product. Coffee extract can be used to alleviate mental and physical fatigue [34]. In a randomized placebo-controlled, double-blind study, a subcutaneous injection of 10 ml coffee preparation accelerated recovery from diarrhea in 30% of newborn calves (table 3) [35]. For all coffee preparations, the dosages administered by the farmers were higher than used in the placebo-controlled study, probably due to the different routes of administration [35]. Marigold Flowers (Calendula officinalis L., Calendulae flos) Ointments, tinctures, and infusions prepared from marigold flowers were used to treat wounds and teat lesions. These administrations were also documented in Austria and Swiss Safiental; marigold infusions were also given to treat indigestion [11, 16]. The antibacterial, antifungal, immunostimulant, and wound healing properties of marigold are exploited in veterinary medicine in the topical treatment of lacerations, contusions, and slow-healing wounds [27]. Comfrey (Symphytum officinale L., Symphyti radix, Symphyti herba) The farmers prepared ointments and tinctures from comfrey roots, or used the leaves directly to treat sprains, contusions, swollen joints, or indigestion. Comparable results were found in Swiss Safiental [16]. No usage of comfrey has been documented in Austria [6, 9, 11]. In veterinary medicine, comfrey is used in topical application to treat contusions, sprains, and pulled muscles [27]. Allantoine and hydroxycinnamic acid derivatives are considered to be responsible for the analgesic, antiphlogistic properties of comfrey [29]. Common Buckthorn (Rhamnus catharticus L.) The farmers used branches of Rhamnus catharticus L. against cattle ringworm. This kind of treatment has only been documented in Switzerland. Despite lacking scientific data and the fact that the herbs were not administered or applied to the animals but hung up in the stable, this type of use seems to be common, and the farmers were highly satisfied with the results of the treatment. Conclusion The investigated farmers in the Northern part of Switzerland administered a variety of homemade herbal remedies mainly based on plants from the families of Asteraceae, Lamiaceae, and Apiaceae. With few exceptions, categories of use and dosages were comparable with the available literature. In general, the farmers were satisfied with the outcome of the applications. Further studies in other regions of Europe should be carried out to get a closer view on traditional knowledge and use of homemade herbal remedies. Forsch Komplementmed 2012;19:125–136 135 Acknowledgement Disclosure Statement The authors sincerely thank the organic advisory services of the cantons Zurich, Schaffhausen and Aargau, the ‘Schweizerische Medizinische Gesellschaft für Phytotherapie’ (SMGP), the Paul Schiller Foundation, the Bristol Foundation (both in Zurich), and the PlantaVet GmbH for financial support of the study. The authors declare no conflict of interest. References 1 McCorkle CM: An introduction to ethnoveterinary research and development. J Ethnobiol 1986;6:129– 149. 2 WHO: Traditional Medicine. Fact sheet no. 134, 2008. www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs134/en. 3 Anyinam C: Ecology and ethnomedicine: exploring links between current environmental crisis and indigenous medical practices. Soc Sci Med 1995;40: 321–329. 4 Pieroni A, Howard P, Volpato G, Santoro RF: Natural remedies and nutraceuticals used in ethnoveterinary practices in Inland Southern Italy. Vet Res Commun 2004;28:55–80. 5 Maphosa V, Masika PJ: Ethnoveterinary uses of medicinal plants: a survey of plants used in the ethnoveterinary control of gastro-intestinal parasites of goats in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. Pharm Biol 2010;48:697–702. 6 Bizaj M: Lokales Wissen von Osttiroler Bäuerinnen und Bauern über Pflanzen und Hausmittel zur Gesunderhaltung und Krankheitsbehandlung ihrer Tiere und die Bedeutung für den biologischen Landbau. Diplomarbeit an der Universität für Bodenkultur Wien, Institut für ökologischen Landbau, Department für Nachhaltige Agrarsysteme, 2005. 7 Blanco E, Macia MJ, Morales R: Medicinal and veterinary plants of El Caurel (Galicia, Northwest Spain). J Ethnopharmacol 1999;65:113–124. 8 Bonet MA, Vallès J: Ethnobotany of Montseny biosphere reserve (Catalonia, Iberian Peninsula): plants used in veterinary medicine. J Ethnopharmacol 2007;110:130–147. 9 Grabowski M: «Meisterwurz und Aderlass». Anwendung und Wandel des ethnoveterinärmedizinischen Wissens im Grossen Walsertal/Voralberg unter Hervorhebung der pflanzlichen Hausmittel und des religiösen Brauchtums. Diplomarbeit an der Universität Wien, 2010. 10 Pieroni A, Guisti ME, de Pasquale C, Lenzarini C, Censorii E, Gonzales-Tejero M, Sanchez-Rojas C, Ramiro-Gutierrez J, Skoula M, Johnson C, Sarpaki A, Della A, Paraskeva-Hadijchambi D, Hadjichambis A, Hmamouchi M, El-Jorhi S, El-Demerdash M, El-Zayat M, Al-Shahaby O, Houmani Z, Scherazed M: Circum-Mediterranean cultural heritage and medicinal plant uses in traditional animal healthcare: a field survey in eight selected areas within the RUBIA project. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed 2006;2:16. 136 11 Rudolph G: Lokales Erfahrungswissen von Biobäuerinnen und Biobauern in der West- und Südsteiermark über den Einsatz von Pflanzenarten und Hausmitteln in der Tierheilkunde im Vergleich zum Erfahrungswissen von Landwirten in den nördlichen gemässigten Klimazonen. Diplomarbeit an der Universität für Bodenkultur Wien, Institut für ökologischen Landbau, Department für Nachhaltige Agrarsysteme, 2008. 12 Schunko C, Vogl CR: Organic farmers use of wild food plants and fungi in a hilly area in Styria (Austria). J Ethnobiol Ethnomed 2010;6:17. 13 Vogl-Lukasser B, Vogl CR, Bizaj M, Grassner S, Bertsch C: Lokales Erfahrungswissen über Pflanzenarten aus Wildsammlung mit Verwendung in der Fütterung und als Hausmittel in der Volksheilkunde bei landwirtschaftlichen Nutztieren in Osttirol, Projekt gefördert vom Land Tirol und dem Lebensministerium (BM:LFUW), 2006. www.nas. boku.ac.at/fileadmin/_/H93/H933/Personen/ Vogl/1272_VOGL_Wildsammlung03042006.pdf. 14 Vogl-Lukasser B, Vogl CR, Bizaj M, Grasser S: Tierheilkunde mit Hausmitteln. Freiland J 2006;3: 10–11. 15 Scherrer AM, Motti R, Weckerle CS: Traditional plant use in the areas of Monte Vesole and Ascea, Cilento National Park (Campania, Southern Italy). J Ethnopharmacol 2005;97:129–143. 16 Joos B: Lokales Wissen über Gesundheit und Krankheit des Viehs in Graubünden. Diplomarbeit an der Universität für Bodenkultur Wien, Institut für Ökologischen Landbau, Department für Nachhaltige Agrarsysteme, 2010. 17 Council Regulation (EC) no. 834/2007 on Organic Production and Labelling of Organic Products. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do ?uri=OJ:L:2007:189:0001:0023:EN:PDF. 18 Verordnung über die biologische Landwirtschaft und die Kennzeichnung biologisch produzierter Erzeugnisse und Lebensmittel. Stand 1.1.2011. Artikel 16. www.admin.ch/ch/d/sr/910_18/index.html. 19 Tierarzneimittelkompendium der Schweiz. wwwvetpharm.uzh.ch/perldocs/index_t.htm. 20 Schweizer Bauernverband. www.sbv-usp.ch/de/ statistik. 21 Bernard HR: Research Methods in Anthropology – Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, ed 4. Walnut Creek, CA, Altamira Press, 2006. Forsch Komplementmed 2012;19:125–136 22 Weller SC, Romney AK: Systematic Data Collection – Qualitative Research Methods Series, volume 10. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications, 1988, pp 9–20. 23 Microsoft Access database (version 2010). http:// office.microsoft.com/en-us/access/. 24 Löscher W, Ungemach FR, Kroker R: Grundlagen der Pharmakotherapie bei Haus- und Nutztieren, 2. Auflage. Berlin, Paul Parey, 1994, S. 400–401. 25 Zealley AK, Aitken RCB: Measurement of Mood. Proc R Soc Med 1969;62:993–996. 26 Uncini Manganelli RE, Camangi F, Tomei PE: Curing animals with plants: traditional usage in Tuscany (Italy). J Ethnopharmacol 2001;78:171–191. 27 Reichling J, Gachnian-Mirtscheva R, Frater-Schröder M, Saller R, Di Carlo A, Widmaier W: Heilpflanzenkunde für Tierärzte. Berlin, Springer, 2005. 28 ESCOP Monographs, ed 2, completely revised and expanded. Stuttgart, Thieme, 2003. 29 Wichtl M: Teedrogen und Phytopharmaka – ein Handbuch für die Praxis auf wissenschaftlicher Grundlage, 5. Auflage. Stuttgart, Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, 2009. 30 Cemek M, Yilmaz E, Büyükokuroglu ME: Protective effect of Matricaria chamomilla on ethanolinduced acute gastric mucosal injury in rats. Pharm Biol 2010;48:757–763. 31 Boskabady MH, Aslani MR, Kiani S: Relexant effect of Thymus vulgaris on guinea-pig tracheal chains and its possible mechanism(s). Phytother Res 2006;20:28–33. 32 Hawrelak JA, Cattley T, Myers SP: Essential oils in the treatment of intestinal dysbiosis: a preliminary in vitro study. Altern Med Rev 2009;14:4. 33 Al-Essa MK, Shafagoj YA, Mohammed FI, Afifi FU: Relaxant effect of ethanol extract of Carum carvi on dispersed intestinal smooth muscle cells of the guinea pig. Pharm Biol 2010;48:76–80. 34 Hiller K, Melzig MF: Die große Enzyklopädie der Arzneipflanzen und Drogen, genehmigte Sonderausgabe. Erfstadt, Area, 2006. 35 Ponepal V, Spielberger U, Riedel-Caspari G, Schmidt FW: Use of a Coffea arabica tosta extract for the prevention and therapy of polyfactorial infectious diseases in newborn calves. Dtsch Tierarztl Wochenschr 1996;103:390–394. Schmid/Ivemeyer/Vogl/Klarer/Meier/ Hamburger/Walkenhorst JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY AND ETHNOMEDICINE Ethnoveterinary herbal remedies used by farmers in four north-eastern Swiss cantons (St. Gallen, Thurgau, Appenzell Innerrhoden and Appenzell Ausserrhoden) Disler et al. Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 RESEARCH JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY AND ETHNOMEDICINE Open Access Ethnoveterinary herbal remedies used by farmers in four north-eastern Swiss cantons (St. Gallen, Thurgau, Appenzell Innerrhoden and Appenzell Ausserrhoden) Monika Disler1, Silvia Ivemeyer2, Matthias Hamburger1, Christian R Vogl3, Anja Tesic4, Franziska Klarer5, Beat Meier5 and Michael Walkenhorst2* Abstract Background: Very few ethnoveterinary surveys have been conducted in central Europe. However, traditional knowledge on the use of medicinal plants might be an option for future concepts in treatment of livestock diseases. Therefore the aim of this study was to document and analyse the traditional knowledge and use of homemade herbal remedies for livestock by farmers in four Swiss cantons. Methods: Research was conducted in 2012. Fifty farmers on 38 farms were interviewed with the aid of semistructured interviews. Detailed information about the plants used and their mode of preparation were documented as well as dosage, route of administration, category of use, origin of knowledge, frequency of use, and satisfaction with the treatment. Results: In total, 490 homemade remedies were collected. Out of these, 315 homemade remedies contained only one plant species (homemade single species herbal remedies, HSHR), which are presented in this paper. Seventy six species from 44 botanical families were mentioned. The most HSHR were quoted for the families of Asteraceae, Polygonaceae and Urticaceae. The plant species with the highest number of HSHRs were Matricaria recutita L., Calendula officinalis L., Rumex obtusifolius L. and Urtica dioica L. For each HSHR, one to eight different applications were enumerated. A total of 428 applications were documented, the majority of which were used to treat cattle. The main applications were in treatment of skin afflictions and sores, followed by gastrointestinal disorders and metabolic dysfunctions. Topical administration was most frequently used, followed by oral administration. In nearly half of the cases the knowledge on preparing and using herbal remedies was from forefathers and relatives. More than one third of the applications were used more than ten times during the last five years, and in about sixty percent of the cases, the last application was during the last year preceding the interviews. Conclusions: Traditional knowledge of farmers about the use of medicinal plants to treat livestock exists in north-eastern Switzerland. Homemade herbal remedies based on this knowledge are being used. The interviewed farmers were satisfied with the outcome of the applications. Keywords: Ethnoveterinary, Herbal remedies, Switzerland (St. Gallen, Thurgau, Appenzell Innerrhoden, Appenzell Ausserrhoden), Farmers * Correspondence: [email protected] 2 Departement of Livestock Science, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, Ackerstrasse 113, Postfach, CH-5070 Frick, Switzerland Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © 2014 Disler et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 Page 2 of 22 Zusammenfassung Hintergrund: Aus weiten Teilen Mitteleuropas fehlen bisher Angaben zur Ethnoveterinärmedizin. Andererseits birgt das traditionelle Erfahrungswissen zu Pflanzen und deren Anwendungen ein grosses Potential für zukünftige Behandlungsstrategien für Nutztierkrankheiten. Ziel dieser Studie war daher die Erfassung und Auswertung des traditionellen Erfahrungswissens zu pflanzlichen Hausmitteln und deren Anwendungen bei Nutztieren auf landwirtschaftlichen Betrieben in vier nordöstlichen Schweizer Kantonen (St. Gallen, Thurgau, Appenzell Innerrhoden und Appenzell Ausserrhoden). Methoden: Von Anfang März bis Ende April 2012 wurden 50 Landwirtinnen und Landwirte auf 38 Betrieben anhand eines semistrukturierten Fragenkatalogs interviewt. Für jede genannte Rezeptur wurden detaillierte Informationen zu den verwendeten Pflanzen und zur Herstellung dokumentiert, darüber hinaus für deren Anwendungsgebiete die Dosierung, Verabreichungsart, Anwendung, Wissensursprung, Einsatzhäufigkeit und die Zufriedenheit mit dem Ergebnis der Therapie. Resultate: Insgesamt wurden 490 Rezepturen erfasst. Davon enthielten 315 Rezepturen je nur eine einzelne Pflanzenart. Ausschliesslich diese Rezepturen wurden in die Auswertung einbezogen. Sechsundsiebzig verschiedene Pflanzenarten aus 44 Pflanzenfamilien wurden hierfür verwendet. Die Pflanzenfamilien Asteraceae, Polygonaceae und Urticaceae waren am häufigsten vertreten. Die meistgenannten Pflanzenarten waren Matricaria recutita L., Calendula officinalis L., Rumex obtusifolius L. und Urtica dioica L. Für jede Rezeptur wurden bis zu acht verschiedene Anwendungen, insgesamt 428 überwiegend für Rinder, beschrieben. Die meistgenannten Anwendungsgebiete waren Hautveränderungen und Wunden, sowie Erkrankungen des Magen-Darm-Traktes und Stoffwechselstörungen. Am häufigsten wurden topische Verabreichungen genannt, gefolgt von den oralen Verabreichungen. Das Wissen über die Herstellung und Verwendung der Rezepturen stammt fast zur Hälfte von Vorfahren und Verwandten. Mehr als ein Drittel der Anwendungen wurde während der letzten fünf Jahre zehnmal und häufiger benutzt. Die letzte Anwendung erfolgte in rund sechzig Prozent der Fälle innerhalb der letzten zwölf Monate. Schlussfolgerung: Das traditionelle Erfahrungswissen über pflanzliche Hausmittel und deren Anwendungen bei Nutztieren ist in der nordöstlichen Schweiz vorhanden. Die auf diesem Erfahrungswissen basierenden pflanzlichen Rezepturen werden nach wie vor angewendet. Die pflanzlichen Rezepturen werden mit grosser Zufriedenheit zur Behandlung von Nutztieren eingesetzt. Background Ethnoveterinary research is defined as the “systematic investigation and application of veterinary folk knowledge, theory and practise” [1]. In recent years, ethnoveterinary studies have been conducted mainly in Africa, Asia, and in Central America [2]. In developing countries, animal health care is often based on the use of self-made preparations, particularly when access to western veterinary products is difficult or too expensive for the local farmer [3]. Few ethnoveterinary studies on herbal remedies have been conducted in Europe, and surveys have been published for Spain [4-7], the overall mediterranian region [8], Italy [9-11] and Austria [12-15]. Two ethnoveterinary studies have been recently carried out in Switzerland, one in three cantons of the centralnorthern part [16], and the second in a valley (Safiental) of the canton of Graubünden [17]. Traditional medicine is defined by the World Health Organization as “the sum total of the knowledge, skills, and practices based on the theories, beliefs and experiences indigenous to different cultures, whether explicable or not, used in the maintenance of health as well as in the prevention, diagnosis, improvement or treatment of physical and mental illness” [18]. Other authors specify a tradition as the transmission of knowledge over at least three generations, whereas the life span of a generation is not generally defined and varies widely [19]. The traditional knowledge of use of medicinal plants which was transmitted from generation to generation is recently in imminent danger of disappearing [20]. Hence, traditional knowledge might be an option for future concepts in treatment of livestock diseases and, for this reason, should be documented before it gets lost. European Council and Swiss regulations of organic agriculture emphasize the use of “phytotherapeutic products”, “homeopathy”, and “micronutrients” for the treatment of livestock diseases. “Chemically synthesised allopathic veterinary medicinal products including antibiotics” may be used where necessary, but only within strict limitations [21,22]. A total of eleven veterinary medicinal products with herbal ingredients are currently available in Switzerland [23], among these only three products with pure plant ingredients are available [24]. Only few years ago a substantially higher number of herbal Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 veterinary medicinal products were available [23]. Hence, organic farmers have few other choices than using their own herbal remedies. The aim of this research was to document the veterinary usage of plants by farmers in the four neighbouring Swiss cantons of St. Gallen, Thurgau, Appenzell Innerrhoden and Appenzell Ausserrhoden. The focus was on establishing a list of medicinal plants used in homemade remedies, on the preparation of remedies, their uses, and estimation of the amounts of medicinal plant in the final product. The results were compared with other ethnoveterinary studies that have been conducted in Switzerland and in Europe. Methods The methodology of the study was according to the previous project ‘Traditional use of herbal remedies in livestock by organic farmers in three Swiss cantons (Aargau, Zurich, Schaffhausen)” [16]. Study area The study area included the four cantons of St. Gallen, Thurgau, Appenzell Innerrhoden and Appenzell Ausserrhoden, which are situated in the north-east of Switzerland. The four neighbouring cantons are in part adjacent to the region covered by the previous project [16]. The research area is located between 8°4’ and 9°4’ E and 46°5’ and 47°4’ N, and the altitude varies between 370 m and 3247 m above sea level [25]. At a mean altitude of 595 m above sea level the average annual temperature is 7.9° Celsius. The average annual precipitation ranges between 1000 and 1900 millimetres [26,27]. The research area covers a region of 3432 km2, and has approximately 800’000 inhabitants [28]. There were a total of 8887 farms in the four cantons. In St. Gallen 386 (8.4%) out of 4592 farms, in Thurgau 241 (8.2%) out of 2947, in Appenzell Innerrhoden 22 (4.2%) out of 534, and in Appenzell Ausserrhoden 111 (13.6%) out of 814 were organic farms. As the most frequently animal species 6528 (73.5%) out of those 8887 farms kept cattle, 4254 (47.9%) poultry, and 1606 (18.1%) kept pigs [29]. Dialogue partners Different methods were used to recruit dialogue partners. In a first step a letter with detailed information about the project was sent to all organic farmers in the research area. A broader population was informed about the research through publications in the local agricultural press. Furthermore, the project was presented at two farmers’ meetings on complementary medicine. Persons contacted were asked to support the project, either as dialogue partners, or as informants (without own knowledge regarding herbal remedies) Page 3 of 22 providing information on other farmers according to the snowball sampling method [30]. The contacts of the informants are leading to further dialogue partners (Figure 1). Twelve farmers spontaneously agreed to become dialogue partners. All farmers in the study area that belonged to the organic dairy farm research network of the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture in Frick were contacted by phone and asked to support the project. Four additional dialogue partners were recruited by this contact. In addition, all 69 farmers of several supraregional working groups on complementary medicine in the study area were invited by phone. Six farmers could be recruited by this approach. Finally, snowball sampling [30] through several informants led to recruitment of additional 16 interview partners (Figure 1). The following criteria had to be fulfilled by the farmers to qualify as a dialog partner: – The farm had to be in the research area. – The dialogue partner had to nominate at least three different applications of homemade remedies or medical plants. – The dialogue partner had to agree sharing his/ her knowledge to the research team, for analysis and publication of the data in an anonymized form. A total of 38 interviews were conducted between the beginning of March and the end of April 2012. In most cases dialogue partners were interviewed alone. On nine farms one and on one farm three further persons (all family members) asissts the dialogue partner for the interview. As a consequence the information comes from 50 farmers, or members of the farmers’ family. The answers given by persons assisting the dialogue partner were added to the data of the dialogue partner and not analysed separately. For example, if during an interview a member of the farmer’s family named a homemade remedy, which was applied on the same farm by him/ her, the answers were combined with the interview of the main dialog partner. A total of 29 women (58%) and 21 men (42%) with an age between 30 and 81 (55 ± 13) years served as dialogue partners or assisting persons. Twenty-two interviews were held in the canton of St. Gallen, nine in Thurgau, two in Appenzell Innerrhoden, and five in Appenzell Ausserrhoden. All farmers, but also the persons assisting the main dialogue partner, were active in animal care on at least one farm. This could be their own farm or, for example, the farm of their descendants. In addition, some of dialogue partners provided their advice to other farmers, or they served as herdsmen on alpine pasture holdings during the summer months. Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 Page 4 of 22 Figure 1 Snowball sampling. DP = dialogue partners; blue = DP from St. Gallen; green = DP from Thurgau; red = DP from Appenzell Innerrhoden and Appenzell Ausserrhoden; grey = supraregional working groups and informants; I = informants; (i) = integrated production (non-organic farms); (o) = organic farms; N = all farmers operating in this canton. Farms Data collection and analysis The altitude of the location of the farms in the research area varied considerably, as the 38 farms were located between 440 m and 1200 m above sea level. Fourteen farms were below 600 m, 13 between 600 m and 900 m, and eleven on an altitude above 900 m. The sample comprised 17 organic and 21 non-organic farms. All farms kept cattle. Thirty six were dairy farms and two were suckler cow husbandries. In addition, 13 farms kept hens, twelve farms had pigs, twelve farms goats, eight farms sheep and five farms horses. The dairy farms kept between seven and 40 cows, the suckler cow farms between 16 and 21 cows. On three farms the agricultural area was between six and ten hectars, on eleven farms between eleven and 15 hectares, on 16 farms between 16 and 25 hectares, and on eight farms the agricultural area was more than 25 hectares. The dialogue partners were asked to give a written agreement for recording the interview and to use the data for analysis and for publication in an anonymized form. The records were not transcribed, but secured for later reference (recorded by OLYMPUS WS 200S Digital Voice Recorder, Olympus Imaging Europa GmbH, Hamburg, Germany). During the face-to-face interviews, the answers were noted on questionnaire forms, and complemented with the audio records. Final data were entered into a database [31]. The interviews were subdivided into three parts: 1) general information about the farm; 2) a semi-structured part constisting of seven “free listing” questions [32]; 3) a structured part with pre-coded and free answer questions to gain detailed information about the specific homemade remedies and their uses. The duration of the interviews was between 1.5 and 4.0 hours. Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 After documentation of some general structural data of the farm like livestock species or farm size (part one of the interview), first impressions of the farmers’ knowledge about plants and formulations were collected in the “free listing” part (part two of the interview). This part of the interview also served to create a casual and pleasant athmosphere. The third part of the interview focused on specific homemade remedies. Depending on the particular question the respondent had pre-coded and free answer possibilities. Plants collected from the wild or cultivated in home gardens were identified with the aid of the standard taxonomic reference “Flora Helvetica” [33]. Herbal drugs and extracts from commercial sources were identified with the aid of their package leaflet, or were assumed to be correctly delivered by the pharmacies. Whenever possible, a photographic documentation of the dried plants or their more or less processed products was made. It was not possible to collect herbarium voucher specimens during the interviews, since they were conducted in early spring. However, it was possible to collect from July to September 2012 a total of 16 herbarium voucher specimens on 10 farms. These specimens included 10 plant species collected in the wild. Herbarium voucher specimens were dried, labelled and deposited at the botanical repository of the University of Zurich and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (Botanischer Garten, Zollikerstrasse 107, 8008 Zurich, Switzerland). The dialogue partners were asked for information on the manufacturing processes for their homemade herbal remedies. Details such as source of the herbal material, and procedures for extraction and preparation of the finished product were documented. Whenever possible, the amount of plant used was determined on site with the aid of a scale (Mettler P1000N, Mettler- Toledo GmbH, Greifensee, Switzerland), in order to calculate concentrations in g dry plant equivalent per 100 g of finished product. This could be conducted either with plants from the dialog partner, or with a collection of herbal material of Pharmacopoeia quality [34] purchased by pharmacy. If this was not possible, dosages were estimated by assessment of the administered volume of a herb and subsequent weighing. The reported uses for each remedy were recorded. The respondent could give a free answer which was afterwards coded into categories of use according to the anatomical therapeutic chemical classification system for veterinary medicinal products ATCvet [35]. Route and frequency of administration, and mean duration of treatment were also recorded. The routes of administration were classified into external, internal, and treatment of housing environment. External administration was defined as administration onto intact skin, and altereted or sore skin, respectively. If the preparation was administered into Page 5 of 22 a body orifice (oral, intravaginal/intrauterine administration, inhalation) it was classified as internal administration. Treatment of environment or stable was defined as treatment to improve animal health, but without direct contact to the animal itself. The daily dosage of medicinal plant (dry plant equivalent) was calculated for all prepratations that were administered orally. For a comparison between different species (including human), daily dosages were normalized by a conversion of all dosages into dosage per kilogram metabolic bodyweight (MBW = bodyweight0.75) [36]. The following formula was used: daily dose ! g kg 0:75 " drug dose per administration ðg Þ $ repetition per day ¼ metabolic bodyweight ðkg 0:75 Þ ð1Þ Live weight of animals were taken from Table 1 [37,38]. For topically administered preparations, the concentration in g drug equivalent per 100 g of finished product was calculated. Furthermore, the origin of knowledge for homemade remedies was documented, as well as the interview partners’ estimate on the frequency of use during the last five years, and the date of the last use. Also, information whether remedies were administered solely or in combination with other therapies was recorded. To evaluate the satisfaction with the outcome of the application, a visual analog scale (VAS) was used [39]. A scale of 100 mm was used, with “no effect” corresponding to 0 mm, and “very good effect” to 100 mm. Mean and standard deviation of the VAS were calculated for each category of use. In a second phase of the study, data were compared with the results from earlier ethnoveterinary studies in Table 1 Metabolic body weight of different species based on estimated average body weights [37,38] Species Weight Metabolic bodyweight (MBW) Adult cattle 650 kg 128.7 kg0.75 Calf 75 kg 25.5 kg0.75 Pig 200 kg 53.2 kg0.75 Young pig 15 kg 7.6 kg0.75 Donkey 200 kg 53.2 kg0.75 Goat 50 kg 18.8 kg0.75 Medium-sized dog 25 kg 11.2 kg0.75 Young sheep 20 kg 9.5 kg0.75 Rabbit 3 kg 2.3 kg0.75 Hen 1 kg 1.0 kg0.75 Rat 0.175 kg 0.3 kg0.75 Human 65 kg 22.9 kg0.75 Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 other parts of Switzerland [16,17], in Austria [12-15], Italy [2,9,11], and in Spain [4-7]. Definitions Homemade remedy We defined as one homemade remedy a description of a preparation from one dialogue partner containing one ore more plants, plant parts or other natural compounds more or less processed to a finished product: [dialogue partner] × [plant species or other natural compounds] × [plant part] × [manufacturing process to the finished product]. Application We sampled only homemade remedies which were intended to be administered to an animal in case of a disease or as a preventive measure. Therefore one homemade remedy was connected to one or more applications. We defined as one application the description of the use of one homemade remedy as combination of the category of use (for example skin alterations and sores), the specification of use (for example an open wound or a skin infection), the intended animal species, the age classification of the intended animal and the administration procedure: [homemade remedy] × [category of use] × [specification of use] × [animal species] × [animal age classification] × [administration procedure]. Results The dialog partners listed between four and 28 homemade remedies each (mean 12.9 ± 5.4) and mentioned between one and eight different applications for each homemade remedy (mean 1.3 ± 0.7). This led to a total of 490 homemade remedies. Ninety-four plant species belonging to 50 plant families were mentioned. Thirtytwo out of the 490 homemade remedies included homemade complex herbal remedies containing two to nine plant species, 143 homemade remedies without plant species but containing one or more natural products like curds, eggs, honey, lard, pure alcohol, propolis, red wine, salt, soft soap or vinegar, and 315 homemade remedies (including 19 based on commercial extracts) containg only one plant species (homemade single species herbal remedies, HSHR). Composition and manufacturing process of the 315 HSHR Only the 315 homemade HSHR (see Additional file 1) were analysed in detail. They contained 67 different plant species belonging to 44 families. Plants belonging to the Asteraceae were the most frequently reported uses (73 HSHR, 23.2%), followed by Polygonaceae (21 HSHR, 6.7%) and Urticaceae (21 HSHR, 6.7%). The species with the highest number of reports were Matricaria recutita L. (26 HSHR, 8.3%), Calendula officinalis L. (24 HSHR, Page 6 of 22 7.6%), Rumex obtusifolius L. (21 HSHR, 6.7%), and Urtica dioica L. (21 HSHR, 6.7%) (Table 2). The most commonly used plant parts were flowers (75 HSHR, 23.8%). Herbs (aerial parts of a herbaceous plant, without roots) were used in 66 HSHR (21.0%), followed by fruits, seeds and berries (45 HSHR, 14.3%) and leaves (41 HSHR, 13.0%). Other plant parts, such as twigs, roots, barks, whole plants, and plant excretions such as resins were mentioned (Table 2). In 150 HSHR (47.6%) wild-harvested plants were used, while commercial drugs and cultivated plants were used in 97 HSHR (30.8%) and 68 HSHR (21.6%), respectively. Fresh plants were used in 58.4% HSHR, and dried plants in 35.6% of the HSHR. In 19 HSHR (6.0%), commercial products, such as Kamillosan® (MEDA Pharma GmbH, Wangen-Brüttisellen; Switzerland), NPJ Liniment® (Casa Verde GmbH, Dortmund, Germany) and OPIFIX® (Multiforsa AG, Auw, Switzerland) (both containing Mentha canadensis L.), Pelargonium Spray (containing Pelargonium sidoides DC; Alpinamed AG, Freidorf, Switzerland), and various products manufactured and marketed by local pharmacies (eg. tea tree oil, thyme oil, and various products of arnica, calendula, comfrey, common tormentill, goldenrod, and St John’s wort oil) were used. Preparations containing one of these commercial products are assigned to the remedies prepared without extraction (Table 2), because no extraction was carried out on the farm. Beside these 19 commercial products (6.0%), additional 86 HSHR (27.3%) contained plants that were processed to the final remedy without any extraction step being performed. Such remedies served mainly for oral administration, topical treatment of injuries, or treatment of animal housing. Collard (Brassica oleracea L.), comfrey (Symphytum officinale L.), beetroot (Beta vulgaris), and broad-leaved dock (Rumex obtusifolius L.), for example, were directly applied onto intact skin for the treatment of injuries like inflamed joints. In 126 HSHR (40.0%) extraction was done with water (including one extraction with milk, containing garlic). These HSHRs were mainly for oral or external administration. Ninety two out of these 126 extracts were infusions, 30 decoctions, and four macerations (extraction at ambient temperature). In 62 HSHR (19.7%) the farmers used oil or fat as extracting agent, mainly for external administration. In 40 of these 62 HSHR extraction was carried out at ambient temperature, and in 22 cases elevated temperature was used. Maceration with alcohol was mentioned in 22 HSHR (7.0%) (Table 2). A total of 49 HSHR (15.6%) were ointments, and all of them were prepared from fresh plant material. The plants used in these ointments included Calendula officinalis L. (flos; 11), Rumex obtusifolius L. (folium; 11), Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. (resina; 6), Geranium robertianum L.s.str. (herba; 4), Symphytum officinale L. (radix; 4), Malva neglecta Wallr. (herba; 3), Arnica Botanical family Plant species with ≥ 3 named HSHR (Number of named plant species in this family) (Numbers indicate the frequency of mentioned 315 HSHR) Asteraceae (11) All asteraceae (73) On farm extraction procedure (Numbers indicate the frequency of mentioned 315 HSHR) None Water Room temperature Alcohol Infusion 11 33 2a 22 4b 2 Decoction Oil/Fat Room temperature Room temperature Heated up 12 13 4 Matricaria recutita L. (26) [vs] Flos (26) 2 Calendula officinalis L. (24) Flos and flos sine calice (24) 6 8 5 1 1 2 4 Arnica montana L. (8) Flos (8) 2c Senecio ovatus Willd. (4) Herba (4) 4 Senecio alpinus (L.) Scop (3) [vs] Herba (3) Others1 (8) Polygonaceae (1) 3 3d 2 Rumex obtusifolius L. (21) [vs] Radix (4) Folium (16) 4 3 Herba cum radice (1) Urticaceae (1) Malvaceae (3) Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 Table 2 Extraction procedure to prepare the 315 homemade single species herbal remedies (HSHR) 6 7 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 Urtica dioica L. (21) [vs] Herba (21) 11 All Malvaceae (19) 1 10 1 10 4 Malva neglecta Wallr. (13) [vs] Herba (12) 1 Flos (1) 8 1 Tilia cordata Mill. (5) Cortex (5) 1 4 Others2 (1) 1 Rubiaceae (1) Coffea arabica L. (16) Semen (16) 16 Boraginaceae (1) Symphytum officinale L. (15) [vs] 5e Folium (2) 2 4 Page 7 of 22 Radix (13) Rosaceae (7) All Rosaceae (15) 11 1 2 1 2 1 Crataegus laevigata (Poir.) DC. (4) Herba (4) 4 Potentilla erecta (L.) Raeusch. (4) [vs] Rhizoma (4) 1f Prunus spinosa L. (3) Pinaceae (2) Herba (3) 3 Others3 (4) 3 All Pinaceae (13) 7 1 6 Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. (12) Hypericaceae (1) Linaceae (1) Lamiaceae (4) Herba (5) 5 Resina (7) 1 Others4 (1) 1 Hypericum perforatum L. (12) [vs] Flos (12) 2g 6 10 Linum usitatissimum L. (11) Semen (11) 2 All Lamiaceae (9) 6 2 2h 1 Folium (3) 2 1 Others5 (3) 2i Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 Table 2 Extraction procedure to prepare the 315 homemade single species herbal remedies (HSHR) (Continued) 9 1 Mentha canadensis L. (3) Folium (3) Salvia officinalis L. (3) Apiaceae (4) 1 All Apiaceae (8) 5 2 1 2 1 Carum carvi L. (3) Fructus (3) Sanicula europaea L. (3) Brassicaceae (3) Herba (3) 2 Others6 (2) 2 All Brassicaceae (8) 7 1 1 Brassica oleracea L. (4) Folium (4) 4 Oleum (3) Others7 (1) 3 1 Page 8 of 22 Brassica napus L. (3) Geraniaceae (2) All Geraniaceae(8) 3 1 3 1 Herba (7) 2 1 3 1 Others8 (1) 1k All Liliaceae (6) 4 2 2 2§ Geranium robertianum L.s.str. (7) [vs] Amaryllidaceae (2) Allium sativum L. (4) Bulbus (4) 9 Others (2) Theaceae (1) 2 Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze (6) Folium (6) Adoxaceae (1) Sambucus nigra L. (5) Herba (5) Fagaceae (1) 4 1 Quercus robur L. (5) Cortex (5) Aquifoliaceae (1) 6 1 4 Ilex aquifolium L. (4) Herba (3) 3 Folium (1) Poaceae (1) Avena sativa L.s.str. (3) Rhamnaceae (1) Rhamnus cathartica L. (3) Others10 (26) 26 other plant species (34) [vs] Fructus (3) Herba (3) Total (76) Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 Table 2 Extraction procedure to prepare the 315 homemade single species herbal remedies (HSHR) (Continued) 1 1 2 3 181 105 4 7 2 3 3 1 92 30 22 40 22 Page 9 of 22 [vs]: voucher specimens available, voucher numbers are visible in the Additional file 1. 1 Arnica chamissonis Less. (2), Solidago virgaurea L. (2), Achillea millefolium L. (1), Helianthus annuus L. (1), Tanacetum vulgare L. (1), Tanacetum parthenium (L.) Sch. Bip. (1); 2Althaea officinalis L. (1); 3Alchemilla vulgaris L. Agg. (1), Rubus idaeus L. (1), Malus domestica Borkh. (1), Prunus domestica L. (1); 4Abies alba Mill. (1); 5Lavandula angustifolia Mill. (2), Thymus vulgaris L. (1); 6Petroselinum crispum (Mill.) Fuss (1), Foeniculum vulgare Mill. (1); 7Capsella bursa- pastoris (L.) Medik (1); 8Pelargonium sidoides DC (1); 9Allium cepa L. (2); 10Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris Conditiva group (1) (Amaranthaceae); Dryopteris filix-mas (L.) Schott (1) (Aspidiaceae); Betula pendula Roth (1) (Betulaceae); Cannabis sativa L. (1) (Cannabaceae); Chenopodium bonus-henricus L. (1) (Chenopodiaceae); Juniperus communis L.s.str. (2) (Cupressaceae); Thuja occidentalis L. (2) (Cupressaceae); Equisetum arvense L. (1) (Equisetaceae); Vaccinium myrtillus L. (2) (Ericaceae); Anthyllis vulneraria L.s.str. (1) (Fabaceae); Gentiana lutea L. (1) (Gentianaceae); Juglans regia L. (1) (Juglandaceae); Cinnamomum verum J.Presl (1) (Lauraceae); Lycopodium clavatum L. (1) (Lycopodiaceae); Myristica fragrans Houtt. (2) (Myristicaceae); Melaleuca alternifolia Maiden&Betche ex Cheel (2) (Myrtaceae); Fraxinus excelsior L. (2), Olea europaea L. (1) (Oleaceae); Pedicularis verticillata L. (1) (Orobanchaceae); Euphrasia officinalis L. (1), Plantago lanceolata L. (2) (Plantaginaceae); Citrus x limon (L.) Burm.f. (1) (Rutaceae); Salix caprea L. (1) (Salicaceae); Quassia amara L. (1) (Simaroubaceae); Solanum tuberosum L. (2) (Solanaceae); Tropaeolum majus L. (1) (Tropaeolaceae). a Kamillosan® Liquidum used in two remedies; bCalendula tincture (pharmacy) used in one remedy; Calendula ointment (pharmacy) used in three remedies; cArnica oil (pharmacy) used in one remedy; Arnica ointment (pharmacy) used in one remedy; dGoldenrod ointment (pharmacy) used in one remedy; eComfrey emulsion (pharmacy) used in one remedy; fCommon tormentil tincture (pharmacy) used in one remedy; gSt John's wort oil (pharmacy) used in two remedies; hNPJ Liniment® and OPIFIX® (both containing Mentha arvensis L. var. piperascens) used in two remedies; iThyme oil used in one remedy; kPelargonium Spray® used in one remedy; lTea Tree oil used in two remedies. § one extraction with milk. Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 montana L. (flos; 2), Matricaria recutita L. (flos; 2), Solanum tuberosum L. (potato peelings; 2), Juniperus communis L. (herba; 1), Solidago virgaurea L.s.str. (herba; 1), Hypericum perforatum L. (flos; 1) or Chenopodium bonus-henricus L. (folium; 1). The most frequently used ointment base was bees’ wax (38 HSHR). In six cases the ointment base (lard and milking grease, a kind of vaseline) served directly as extractant. Other animal fats and vegetable oils were also used as ointment base. In 96 HSHR (30.5%) it was possible to estimate the amount of plant used in the remedies directly on the farm. This was done either with plant material provided by the interview partners (80 HSHR, 25.4%), or with the aid of plant samples from our collection of herbal drugs (16 HSHR, 5.1%). In 107 cases (34.0%) the weight was estimated by assessment of the administered volume of a plant and subsequent weighing. In additional 112 cases (35.5%) it was not possible to determine the weight of the plants used. Categories of use of the 428 applications of the 315 HSHR In total, 428 applications (see Additional file 1) were mentioned for the 315 HSHR to treat cattle, goats, horses, pigs, rabbits, hens, donkeys, sheep and dogs. The most frequently reported uses were for treatment of skin alteration and sores (182 applications, 42.5%), gastrointestinal disorders and metabolic dysfunction (94 applications, 22.0%), treatment of the musculoskeletal system (incl. hematoma in the connective tissue) (37 applications, 8.6%), infertility and diseases of female genitals (36 applications, 8.4%), mastitis (18 applications, 4.2%), respiratory tract diseases (14 applications, 3.3%), and others (47 applications, 11.0%; treatment of parasitic diseases, behaviour and sensory organs, and general strengthening) (Table 3). Calendula officinalis L. (42 applications), Malva neglecta Wallr. (21 applications), Matricaria recutita L. (15 applications), Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. (resin; 15 applications), and Hypericum perforatum L. (14 applications) were the most frequently used plants for treatment of skin afflictions and sores. The highest number of uses for treatment of gastrointestinal disorders and metabolic dysfunctions was listed for Coffea arabica L. (17 applications, always in conjunction with schnaps), Matricaria recutita L. (13 applications) and Linum usitatissimum L. (10 applications). For treatment of injuries of the musculoskeletal system (incl. hematoma of connective tissue) Symphytum officinale L. (12 applications), Rumex obtusifolius L. (7 applications) and Arnica montana L. (5 applications) were most often mentioned. Urtica dioica L. (9 applications), Matricaria recutita L. (5 applications) and Tilia cordata Mill. (5 applications) were most frequently mentioned for treatment of infertility and diseases of female genitals (Table 3). Page 10 of 22 Ointments containing Rumex obtusifolus L. (6 applications) and Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. (3 applications) were most frequently mentioned in the treatment of mastitis, and Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. (6 applications) was most often mentioned for treatment of respiratory tract diseases (Table 3). Out of 428 applications 359 were for treatment of cattle (83.9%), and 32 applications (7.5%) were used for other animal species. No specific animal species were mentioned for 37 applications (8.6%) all for the treatment of skin afflications and sores (Table 3). Route of administration of the 428 applications of the 315 HSHR More than half of all administrations were external, mainly on altered and sore skin including claws, hooves, navels and conjunctiva (164 applications, 38.3%). For these treatments the farmers used the preparations as a bath, compress, wash, or simply as a direct application of the fresh plants or oils, ointments and tinctures thereof. Administration on intact skin was reported in 71 applications (16.6%), mainly to treat internal injuries like pulled muscles, contusions, sprains, swellings and tensions, mastitis or as repellent against ectoparasites. Some farmers reported that they rubbed the calves’ small of the back with an oil or ointment to treat inflammations of the navel (Table 3). Oral administration of HSHR was reported for 159 applications (37.1%), mainly to treat diarrhoea, stomach trouble, indigestions, flatulence, cough, infertility, and diseases of female genitals (including the cleaning of the uterus after calving), or for general strengthening. Orally HSHR were either added to the feedstuff or constrained oral applicated. A total of 11 applications (2.6%) were intravaginal/ intrauterine, to prevent or treat an inflammation of the uterus, or for cleaning the uterus after calving. Two preparations (0.5%) were used for inhalative purposes to treat ailments of the respiratory tract (Table 3). A total of 21 preparations (4.9%) were used in the stable and surrounding area, without direct contact to the animal itself: To combat cattle ringworm, twigs of Crataegus laevigata (Poir.) DC., Prunus spinosa L., Rhamnus cathartica L. or Ilex aquifolium L. were suspended in the stable for several weeks. The farmers used these both as a prophylactic and therapeutic measure. Other treatments of housing environments were used as measures to prevent flu, or as repellent for parasites (Table 3). Further information regarding applications For all applications, the date of their last use was queried. More than 60% of the applications have been used within the last year preceding the interviews. More than a year ago, but within the last ten years, additional 114 (Numbers indicate the frequency of mentioned applications, 428 applications are mentioned totally) Botanical family (Number of named plant species in this family) Plant species with ≥ 3 named HSHR (Number of named remedies are given in brackets) Asteraceae (11) All Asteraceae (73) Routes of administration External Categories of use Target animal species Total different Treatment applications of housing IH IU Skin Gast Infe Mast Musc Resp Others11 Cattle No spec. Others12 environment Internal I A OR 13 77 17 5 79 16 6 17a 13 4 15a 13 5 4b 39b 1 1 42b 1 1 5c 5 5 5 3 1 6 4 92 15 5 112 1 31a 2 1 34 1 35b 7b 3 45 5c 6c 4 10 5 3 2 5 3 3 Matricaria recutita L. (26) Flos (26) Calendula officinalis L. (24) Flos and flos sine calice (24) Arnica montana L. (8) Flos (8) Senecio ovatus Willd. (4) Herba (4) Senecio alpinus (L.) Scop (3) Herba (3) 1 Others (8) Polygonaceae (1) 4 d d 8 3 9 2 1 3 1 3 Folium (16) 18 8 Herba cum radice (1) 3 14 1 4 9 2 15 6 7 4 2 21 4 3 1 2 26 1 2 Urtica dioica L. (21) Herba (21) Malvaceae (3) 1 3 d Rumex obtusifolius L. (21) Radix (4) Urticaceae (1) d Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 Table 3 428 applications of 315 homemade herbal remedies containing a single herb (HSHR): routes of administration, categories of use, and target animal species All Malvaceae (19) 1 28 2 1 23 4 1 21 21 1 1 1 23 8 9 5 10 17 1 11 29 1 26 1 2 29 1 19 1 2 22 Malva neglecta Wallr. (13) Herba (12) Flos (1) 1 1 Tilia cordata Mill. (5) Cortex (5) Others2 (1) 4 1 1 5 1 5 5 1 1 Page 11 of 22 Rubiaceae (1) Coffea arabica L. (16) Semen (16) Boraginaceae (1) Rosaceae (7) 18 17 1 16 2 18 Symphytum officinale L. (15) Radix (13) 10e Folium (2) 3 4 4 1 9e 3 All Rosaceae (15) 10 7 7 4 4 5 2 3 9e 5 1 1 16 14 1 3 1 17 Crataegus laevigata (Poir.) DC. (4) Herba (4) 4 4 5f 5 3 3 Potentilla erecta (L.) Raeusch. (4) 5f Rhizoma (4) 4f 1 Prunus spinosa L. (3) Herba (3) 3 3 5 Others (4) Pinaceae (2) All Pinaceae (13) 3 5 14 1 7 2 15 3 2 4 6 2 25 4 1 5 1 1 5 26 Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. (12) Herba (5) Resina (7) 5 5 14 Others4 (1) Hypericaceae (1) Lamiaceae (4) 15 3 2 1 19 1 5 1 20 1 1 Hypericum perforatum L. (12) Flos (12) Linaceae (1) 1 Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 Table 3 428 applications of 315 homemade herbal remedies containing a single herb (HSHR): routes of administration, categories of use, and target animal species (Continued) 7g 12g 14g 2 2 1 4g 17g 4 21 Linum usitatissimum L. (11) Semen (11) 1 All Lamiaceae(9) 3 12 1 5 1 1 10 2 2 2 1 3 2 1 2 2h 1h 2 1 14 2 10 14 1 1 12 Mentha canadensis L. (3) Folium (3) 3h 2 5h 5 Salvia officinalis L. (3) Folium (3) Others5 (3) 3 1 1 1i 2 1 1 1 1i 2 2 3i 1 1 3 4 Page 12 of 22 Apiaceae (4) All Apiaceae (8) 2 5 1 2 4 2 8 8 3 3 1 3 3 1 2 2 Carum carvi L. (3) Fructus (3) 3 3 Sanicula europaea L. (3) Herba (3) 2 Others6 (2) Brassicaceae (3) All Brassicaceae (8) 1 2 2 3 4 2 3 1 1 1 3 4 2 2 2 9 1 10 4 1 5 Brassica oleracea L. (4) Folium (4) 3 2 Brassica napus L. (3) Oleum (3) Others7 (1) Geraniaceae(2) 2 1 2 1 All Geraniaceae (8) 6 4 6 2 3 6 2 1 1 4 1 1 4 1 8 1 1 10 7 1 1 9 1 Geranium robertianum L.s.str. (7) Herba (7) 6 Others8 (1) Amaryllidaceae (2) All Liliaceae (6) 1k 1 4 1 3 1 1k 1 1 1 1 1k Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 Table 3 428 applications of 315 homemade herbal remedies containing a single herb (HSHR): routes of administration, categories of use, and target animal species (Continued) 1 5 4 2 6 4 2 2 4 1 2 Allium sativum L. (4) Bulbus (4) Others9 (2) Theaceae (1) 1 Folium (6) Adoxaceae (1) 7 6 1 7 5 4 1 5 5 3 1 5 5 3 3 2 2 Quercus robur L. (5) Cortex (5) Aquifoliaceae (1) 7 Sambucus nigra L. (5) Herba (5) Fagaceae (1) 2 Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze (6) 1 3 1 1 Ilex aquifolium L. (4) Herba (3) Folium (1) 3 2 2 1 2 Page 13 of 22 Poaceae (1) Avena sativa L.s.str. (3) Fructus (3) Rhamnaceae (1) 1 2 1 Herba (3) Others 10 (26) Total (76) 1 1 3 3 Rhamnus cathartica L. (3) 26 other plant species (34) l 5 10 71 164 159 18 2 11 3 3 l l 3 l 3 l l 6 8 9 3 4 3 1 11 34 3 2 39 21 182 94 36 18 37 14 47 359 37 32 428 I – intact skin; A – alterated or sore skin; OR – oral; IH – inhalation; IU – intravaginal/intrauterine; Skin – skin afflictions and sores; Gast – gastrointestinal disorders and metabolic dysfunctions; Infe – Infertility and diseases of female genitals; Mast – Mastitis; Musc – Musculoskeletal system (including hematomas in the connective tissue; Resp – diseases of the respiratory tract; No spec. – no specification of the animal species (external administration). 1 Arnica chamissonis Less. (2), Solidago virgaurea L. (2), Achillea millefolium L. (1), Helianthus annuus L. (1), Tanacetum vulgare L. (1), Tanacetum parthenium (L.) Sch. Bip.(1); 2Althaea officinalis L. (1); 3Alchemilla vulgaris L. Agg. (1), Rubus idaeus L. (1), Malus domestica Borkh.(1), Prunus domestica L. (1); 4Abies alba Mill. (1); 5Lavandula angustifolia Mill. (2), Thymus vulgaris L. (1); 6Petroselinum crispum (Mill.) Fuss (1), Foeniculum vulgare Mill. (1); 7Capsella bursa- pastoris (L.) Medik (1); 8Pelargonium sidoides DC (1); 9Allium cepa L. (2); 10Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris Conditiva group (1) (Amaranthaceae); Dryopteris filix-mas (L.) Schott (1) (Aspidiaceae); Betula pendula Roth (1) (Betulaceae); Cannabis sativa L. (1) (Cannabaceae); Chenopodium bonuscphenricus L. (1) (Chenopodiaceae); Juniperus communis L.s.str. (2) (Cupressaceae); Thuja occidentalis L. (2) (Cupressaceae); Equisetum arvense L. (1) (Equisetaceae); Vaccinium myrtillus L. (2) (Ericaceae); Anthyllis vulneraria L.s.str. (1) (Fabaceae); Gentiana lutea L. (1) (Gentianaceae); Juglans regia L. (1) (Juglandaceae); Cinnamomum verum J.Presl (1) (Lauraceae); Lycopodium clavatum L. (1) (Lycopodiaceae); Myristica fragrans Houtt. (2) (Myristicaceae); Melaleuca alternifolia Maiden&Betche ex Cheel (2) (Myrtaceae); Fraxinus excelsior L. (2), Olea europaea L. (1) (Oleaceae); Pedicularis verticillata L. (1) (Orobanchaceae); Euphrasia officinalis L. (1), Plantago lanceolata L. (2) (Plantaginaceae); Citrus x limon (L.) Burm.f. (1) (Rutaceae); Salix caprea L. (1) (Salicaceae); Quassia amara L. (1) (Simaroubaceae); Solanum tuberosum L. (2) (Solanaceae); Tropaeolum majus L. (1) (Tropaeolaceae); 11parasites, general strengthening, behaviour, sensory organs, varia; 12horses, pigs, donkeys, goats, sheep, dogs, hens, rabbits. a Kamillosan® Liquidum used for two applications; bCalendula tincture (pharmacy) used for two applications, calendula unguent (pharmacy) used for five applications; cArnica oil (pharmacy) used for one application, arnica ointment (pharmacy) used for one application; dGoldenrod unguent (pharmacy) used for three applications; eComfrey emulsion (pharmacy) used for one application; fCommon tormentil tincture (pharmacy) used for one application, gSt John's wort oil (pharmacy) used for four applications; hNPJ Liniment® and OPIFIX® (both containing Mentha arvensis L. var. piperascens) used for three applications; 1Thyme oil used for one application; kPelargonium Spray® used for one application;1Tea Tree oil used for two applications. Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 Table 3 428 applications of 315 homemade herbal remedies containing a single herb (HSHR): routes of administration, categories of use, and target animal species (Continued) Page 14 of 22 Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 applications (26.6%) had been used. In 53 cases (12.4%) the last applications was more than ten years ago or only heared of by the dialog partners. Additionally, we enquired about the frequency of use within the last five years. About one third of all preparations (160; 37.4%) had been used by the farmers more than ten times, and 69 applications (16.1%) between six and nine times during the last five years. A total of 77 (18.0%) had been used between two and five times, and 122 applications (28.5%) had been employed less than two times. In 272 applications (63.5%) the farmers used the HSHR without other accompanying therapies. A total of 156 applications (36.5%) were used in combination with other herbal remedies or homeopathic preparations: three quarters of these HSHR were always used in combination, whereas for the remaining cases a combination with other preparations depended on the specific condition of the animal to be treated. In wound care the combination of two HSHR was common. A typical treatment consisted of cleaning of the wound with one HSHR, and subsequent application of a second HSHR, such as an ointment. If the condition of the animal further deteriorated during treatment, the farmers called a veterinarian. In 48.6% of cases (208 applications) the knowledge on the use of the applications was obtained from ancestors and relatives. Information obtained from friends accounted for additional 77 uses (18.0%). In 58 cases (13.6%) knowledge was acquired through own practical experience. In other cases knowledge was obtained from attending courses (51 applications, 11.9%), from books and journals (13 applications, 3.0%), and others sources (20 applications, 4.7%). The degree of satisfaction of users with the outcome of their treatments could be recorded for a total of 397 applications (Figure 2). In 31 cases it was not possible to assess the degree of satisfaction, e.g. if the last use of a remedy had been long time ago. An average VAS value of over 80 mm represents a high degree of satisfaction. Discussion We collected here for the first time detailed information regarding the knowledge and use of homemade herbal remedies in four cantons located in north-eastern Switzerland (St. Gallen, Thurgau, Appenzell Innerrhoden and Appenzell Ausserrhoden). The methodology used in an earlier survey conducted in a different part of Switzerland [16] was also applied in this study and, again, proved to be suitable. A focus on organic farms was appropriate, since “phytotherapeutic […] products” are one of the preferred methods for the treatment of livestock diseases [21], but on the opposite only very few herbal medicinal products are Page 15 of 22 approved for veterinary purposes [23]. For these reasons organic farmers may be more motivated to prepare their own herbal remedies than non-organic. Thanks to public presentations of the project and to snowball sampling [30] non-organic farmers could also be recruited as interview partners. Interviews were conducted on 17 out of a total of 760 (2.2%) organic farms, and on 21 out of 8127 (0.3%) non-organic farms in the research area. As expected, organic farms were overrepresented in the study, due the approaches used for recruitment of interview partners. The percentage of organic farms participating in this study was comparable with that in an earlier survey [16]. The snowball sampling method is commonly used in ethnoveterinary research [12-17,40]. However, the farms included may not be representative for all farms of the region to be studied. Interviews were conducted in March and April, in order to avoid farmers’ work peaks during summer. A disadvantage of the timing was that plant material was not available, except when farmers kept dried plant material. However some voucher specimen could be generated during the following summer. According to the research in Aargau, Zurich and Schaffhausen [16] this survey determines the dosage and concentration of the used plant, which are not documented elsewhere. This enables to make a comparison with literature regarding recommended dose and concentration respectively (Tables 4 and 5). There was a wide range of dosages and concentrations reported. The high therapeutic index of most herbal drugs may be one explanation. The therapeutic index describes the span of dosage between first therapeutic effects and first toxic effects. As larger the span is as less is the risk compared to the potential therapeutic profit. About 49% of the applications are based on the knowledge of ancestors and relatives which represents a transmission over at least two generations. To document the transmission over more than these both generations as proposed by some authors [19] assumes that the dialogue partner at the moment of the interview still knows, the origin of the knowledge of his ancestor which will be not often the case. The use of a visual analogue scale (VAS) to estimate satisfaction of farmers with the outcome of their treatments certainly gave only subjective results, and not an objective assessment of therapeutic success. However, the generally high degree of satisfaction became obvious, and was in accord with observations in the earlier study [16]. Matricaria recutita L. and Calendula officinalis L. were the most frequently used plants. This finding was in accord with earlier surveys conducted in Switzerland and Austria [13-17]. Likewise, Coffea Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 Page 16 of 22 0 20 40 60 80 100 Skin alterations and sores, all (178) SG (110) TG (33) AI /AR (35) Gastrointestinal disorders and metabolic dysfunction (91) SG (50) TG (17) AI/AR (24) Infertility and diseases of female genitals, all (30) SG (22) TG (1) AI/AR (7) Mastitis, all (18) SG (12) TG (3) AI/AR (3) Musculoskeletal system, all (35) SG (26) TG (5) AI/AR (4) Respiratory tract, all (12) SG (7) TG (3) AI/AR (2) Others, all (33) SG (22) TG (9) AI/AR (2) Total, all (397) SG (249) TG (71) AI/AR (77) Figure 2 Degree of satisfaction of users with their treatment outcome based on a Visual Analogue Scale (mm VAS), mean value and the standard deviation of the VAS are represented. SG = St. Gallen, TG = Thurgau, AI/AR = Appenzell Innerrhoden and Appenzell Ausserrhoden. arabica L., Hypericum perforatum L., Linum usitatissimum L., Symphytum officinale L. and Urtica dioica L. were among the frequently used plants in these surveys [13-17]. In contrast, use of Arnica montana L. was more often reported in our study than in the previous survey conducted in Aargau, Zurich and Schaffhausen [16]. Arnica grows naturally in the alpine regions and is likely better known and accessible to local farmers. An even higher number of uses of arnica was reported from Safiental and Austria [14,15,17]. Rumex obtusifolius L., Geranium robertianum L.s.str. and Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze were often mentioned in our survey, but were much less used in central-northern Switzerland [16]. Malva neglecta L., and resin from Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. were mentioned several times by farmers, and were also frequently used by farmers of Safiental [17]. In contrast, remedies based on plants of the Apiaceae and Lamiaceae families were less frequently reported in the present study than in the survey carried out in centralnorthern Switzerland [16]. The order of the most frequently mentioned categories of use was the same in our survey as in the previous study. However, the percentage of administration on altered and sore skin was more often reported, and oral administrations were less frequently documented in our survey [16]. The ten most often mentioned medicinal plants are discussed in the following sections. The dosage in case of oral administrated applications, respectively the concentrations of topical administrated applications as well as the categories of use are focused. Chamomile flowers (Matricaria recutita L., Matricariae flos) Chamomile was administered internally and externally to treat gastrointestinal diseases, skin afflictions and sores, and infertility and diseases of female genitals. Chamomile was previously documented in ethnoveterinary surveys from Switzerland, Austria, southern Italy, and western Spain [2,8,9,12-17]. In the majority of cases it was used to treat gastrointestinal diseases and skin Plant species with ≥ 3 reported HSHR and documented dosage Daily dose [g/kg0.75] Calf (75 kg) Cattle (650 kg) (MWB = 25.5 kg0.75) (MBW = 128.7 kg0.75) Others1 Determined daily dose Converted animal daily Converted human [g/kg0.75] in Aargau, Zurich Arithmetic mean daily dose [g/kg0.75] dose [g/kg0.75] and Schaffhausen (median; minimum (Reichling et al. [41]) (ESCOP [42]) (arithmetic mean) [16] value- maximum value) 0.04, 0.06, 0.06, 0.07, Coffea arabica L. Semen (18) 0.04 0.09, 0.13, 0.19, 0.19, 0.31, 0.31, 0.45, 0.45, 0.112,1.583 0.35 0.37 (0.19; 0.04-1.58) - - 0.51, 0.71, 1.06 0.19-0.397 0.02, 0.02, 0.03, 0.10, Urtica dioica L. Herba (18) 0.55, 2.21 0.16, 0.22, 0.22, 0.26, 0.064, 0.535, 0.796, 0.905, 1.054 0.49 2.39 (0.26; 0.02-2.21) 0.39-0.988 0.35-0.52 0.19-0.384 0.26, 0.43, 0.96 0.12, 0.16, Matricaria recutita L. Flos(13) 0.16, 0.35, 0.47, 0.53, 0.68, 1.12 0.17, 1.94 0.22 (0.53; 0.12-5.88) 0.19-0.39 0.39-0.52 0.79,1.32, Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 Table 4 Daily dosage in dry plant equivalent per kg metabolic body weight (g/kg0.75) of homemade single species herbal remedies (HSHR) used in orally administered preparations 2.00, 5.88 0.39-1.557 4.41, 4.41, 0.62, 0.78, 1.57, 1.62, Linum usitatissimum L. Semen (12) 5.12, 10.97, Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze Folium (7) 0.12, 0.53, 0.56, Potentilla erecta (L.) Raeusch. Rhizoma (4) 0.004, 0.004 Allium sativum L. Bulbus (3) 1.76 Carum carvi L. Fructus (3) 3.15 0.11, 0.14 Geranium robertianum L.s.str. Herba (3) 0.001 0.02, 0.11 Rumex obtusifolius L. Radix (3) 0.82, 1.18, 3.15 5.16 2.92 (4.21; 0.62-15.69) 15.69 0.98-1.968 0.66 1.62, 7.78, 7.78 0.189 0.62, 0.71, 1.74 0.64 - (0.56; 0.12-1.74) 0.14 0.11, 0.44 - (0.06; 0.004-0.44) 0.1010, 1.5010 1.12 (1.50; 0.10-1.76) 1.13 (0.14; 0.11-3.15) 0.04 (0.02; 0.001-0.11) (1.18; 0.82-3.15) 1 hens, pigs, dogs, rabbit, sheeps, goats and donkeys, 2young sheep, 3rabbits, 4pigs, 5goats, 6donkeys, 7cattle, 8calves, 9dogs, (Camellia sinensis) [50]. 10 hens, 11 rats, 12 0.16-0.317 0.20-0.598 - - 0.16-0.23 0.09-0.17 1.13 0.19-0.39 0.07-0.26 - - - - - - Besra et al.: Antidiarrhoeal Activity of Hot Water Extract of Black Tea Page 17 of 22 1.72 1.67-6.6711, 12 Recommended concentration g dry plant equivalent in 100 g finished product [41,42,48,49] g dry plant equivalent in 100 g finished product Plant species with ≥ 3 HSHR and documented dosage Extractionwith water Extraction with alcohol Extraction with oil/fat Arithmetic mean (median; minimum value - maximum value) Extraction with water 0.10, 0.20 0.01, 0.03, 0.34, 0.38, 0.43, 0.91, 2.33 1.52, 1.73, 1.76, 1.82, Extraction with oil/fat 50.001 [42] 0.28, 0.34, 0.50, 1.22, Calendula officinalis L. Flos and flos sine calice (21) Extraction with alcohol 1.10 (0.91; 0.01-3.27) 0.67-1.33 [42] 20.002 [42] 1.00-5.003 [42] 1.82, 1.87, 2.22, 3.27 1.52, 1.52, 1.75, 1.82, Rumex obtusifolius L. Folium (13) 1.98, 2.00, 2.33, 2.77, 4.31 (2.33; 1.52-20.00) - - - 5.00- 10.004 [41] - 5.005 [49] 11.004[48] 0.5 [42] - - - - up to 17.5 [42] - - - 2.0 [42] 10.00-33.33 [42] - - - - - - - 3.08, 3.59, 3.64, 10.00, 20.00 0.62, 0.66, 0.76, 1.43, Hypericum perforatum L. Flos (10) 1.49, 1.89, 1.96, 2.00, 1.58 (1.69; 0.62-3.00) Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 Table 5 Concentration of medicinal plants in homemade single species herbal remedies (HSHR) in preparations for topical use 2.00, 3.00 Matricaria recutita L. Flos (10) 0.04, 0.18, 0.23, 0.37, 0.40, 0.40, 0.85, 5.00 Symphytum officinale L. Radix (8) 3.51, 4.26, 4.43, 8.33 Malva neglecta Wallr. Herba (6) 0.20, 0.40, 0.40, 0.80 Flos (1) 0.10 Arnica montana L. Flos (6) 2.12, 5.65 1.82, 3.45, 6.35, 6.67 1.82, 1.82 0.90, 0.91, 1.14, 1.96, 2.33 10.00 0.71, 0.74, 0.90, 0.94 Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. Resina (4) 3.53, 12.93, 27.27, 31.75 1 40% ethanol, 290% ethanol, 3semi-solid preparations, 4herb, 5flowering twigs. 4.85 (4.35; 1.82-8.33) 0.79 (0.40; 0.10-1.82) 2.87 (1.55; 0.90-10.00) 0.82 (0.82; 0.71-0.94) 18.87 (20.10; 3.53- 31.75) Page 18 of 22 Geranium robertianum L.s.str. Herba (4) 1.52 (0.40; 0.04- 5.65) Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 afflictions, but also the treatment of infertility and diseases of female genitals have been reported [13,15]. Ethnoveterinary use of chamomile was not documented in surveys conducted in Catalonia, Andalusia, Galicia and Tuscany [5-7,11]. Chamaemelum nobile L., which can be considered as the Mediterranean equivalent of Matricaria recutita L., has been used in Navarra, eastern Spain as an orally administered infusion to treat bloating of ruminants in spring and other diseases [4]. In veterinary medicine the use of chamomile has been reported in the treatment of gastrointestinal disorders, metabolic dysfunction, and skin afflictions and sores [41]. These uses are supported by in vitro and in vivo pharmacological studies [42,43]. In our survey, daily dosages for oral administration reported by farmers were in average higher than the recommended veterinary daily doses [41] and the human daily doses [42]. In addition, the daily dosages were also higher than the mentioned daily doses in the previous survey in central-northern Switzerland [16] (Table 4). The concentrations used in formulations for topical treatment were, in average, higher than the recommended concentration [42] (Table 5). Marigold flowers (Calendula officinalis L., Calendulae flos) The farmers prepared tinctures, oils, ointments and infusions from marigold flowers, and these preparations were mostly used to treat skin afflictions and sores. These uses correspond with those documented in surveys conducted in other parts of Switzerland and in Austria [13,14,16,17]. Use of marigold preparations was mentioned at least once in the treatment of gastrointestinal disorders, diseases of female genitals, and injuries of the musculoskeletal system. Treatment of gastrointestinal disorders, and injuries of the musculoskeletal system has also been documented in Austria [13]. Use in the treatment of wounds has been described in veterinary medicine [41]. These uses are supported by findings from in vitro and in vivo pharmacological studies [42,44,45]. In topical treatment with lipophilic products (extraction with oil or fat) the dosage of herbal drug was within the range recommended by the literature [42]. Within contrast, the concentration of marigold preparations obtained by acqueous or alcoholic extraction were lower than recommended by the ESCOP monograph [42] (Table 5). Page 19 of 22 system. The interview partners highlighted the cooling effect of the leaves, which they considered particularly favourable in case of inflammations. Earlier surveys conducted in Austria and other areas of Switzerland reported the use of broad-leaved dock as a treatment for diarrhoea, or as ointments for injuries [12,14,16,17]. Use of other Rumex species has been documented in Catalonia, Tuscany and Austria [7,11,12]. The calculated average daily dose for oral application of dry plant equivalent was 1.7 g/kg0.75 (Metabolic Body Weight; MBW), and the concentration in ointments for topical use was 4.3 g dry plant equivalent/100 g finished product (Tables 4 and 5). No dose recommendations for broad-leaved dock could be found in monographs or in scientific literature. Stinging nettle (Urtica dioica L.) The herb of stinging nettle was orally administered either directly, or as an infusion. Uses were reported in cattle, goats, pigs and donkeys. It was thus the only herbal drug used to treat four different animal species. This is in line with the findings of an earlier study [16]. Stinging nettle herb was used in cases of infertility, diseases of female genitals, gastrointestinal disorders, metabolic dysfunction, and for general strengthening. In one case stinging nettle was applied externally for treatment of altered or sore skin. Stinging nettle is widely used in Europe, since ethnoveterinary reports documented this herb also in other parts of Switzerland, in Spain, Italy, and Austria [2,4-7,11,13-17]. Veterinary medicine recommends the internal use of stinging nettle herb to increase urinary flow during bacterial and inflammatory diseases, and as an orally or externally administered adjuvant treatment in rheumatic ailments. Stinging nettle herb reportedly shows antihypertensive, analgesic, local anesthetic, antiphlogistic, antirheumatic and diuretic properties [41,42]. The average oral dosages reported by our interview partners were slightly higher for cattle and pigs than the recommended dose, and were comparable to recommended veterinary doses for calves [41,42] (Table 4). Compared to the daily doses documented in Aargau, Zurich and Schaffhausen (2.4 g/kg0.75 (MBW)) [16], lower average doses were used by farmers in our survey (0.5 g/kg0.75 (MBW)) (Table 4). Coffee beans (Coffea arabica L.) Broad-leaved dock (Rumex obtusifolius L.) Decoctions prepared from roots of broad-leaved dock were orally administered for treatment of gastrointestinal disorders, and externally for skin afflictions and sores. Gastrointestinal disorders were also treated by administration of the entire plant with attached roots. Leaves were used, either by direct application onto skin, or after processing to an ointment, to treat skin afflictions and sores, mastitis, and injuries of the musculoskeletal An infusion of toasted coffee beans (coffee) was always administered orally and in combination with schnaps to treat gastrointestinal disorders, metabolic dysfunction, infertility, and diseases of female genitals. In other studies in Switzerland and Austria coffee with, but also without schnaps, has been documented for similar traditional uses [13-17]. The daily dosage of dry plant with an arithmetic mean of 0.4 g/kg0.75 (MBW) is in a comparable range with the Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 daily dosage found in a previous survey conducted in Switzerland [16] (Table 4). Comfrey (Symphytum officinale L.) Preparations made from comfrey root were externally applied in case of injuries of the musculoskeletal system, skin afflictions, and sores and mastitis. Roots were either used freshly crushed, or as extracts prepared with alcohol, oil or fat. Leaves were applied directly onto skin to treat injuries of the musculoskeletal system. Comparable uses have been previously reported from Switzerland and Austria [13-17]. Phytoveterinarian literature recommends topical use of comfrey preparations for treatment of contusions, sprains, and pulled muscles [41,42]. The documented concentrations in g dry plant equivalent per 100 g finished product were lower than the recommended concentration in literature [42] (Table 5). Common Mallow (Malva neglecta Wallr.) Common mallow was mostly used as an infusion, but maceration in water, oil or fat were occasionally also mentioned. It was mainly applied for treatment of altered or sore skin, in particular abscesses of claws and, in one case, for treatment of injuries of the musculoskeletal system. No formulations had been documented from a survey in central-northern Switzerland [16], but treatment of abscesses and wounds had been reported from Safiental, Austria, and northern Spain [4,13,15,17]. In Austria common mallow infusions were also administered orally to treat gastrointestinal disorders [15]. A mean concentration of 0.8 g dry plant equivalent/ 100 g finished product was calculated. No recommended concentration in literature was found (Table 5). St. John's wort (Hypericum perforatum L.) Farmers prepared oils and ointments with St. John’s wort. The interview partners used only flowers, and this was in accord with reports from Safiental and Austria [15,17]. Preparations were used for treatment of skin afflictions and sores, and these uses had also been reported from others parts of Switzerland, Austria, Italy and Spain [4,6,7,9,11,13-17]. Treatments of diseases of female genitals, mastitis, and injuries at the musculoskeletal system were also mentioned by our interview partners, albeit less frequently. Treatment of mastitis and injuries at the musculoskeletal system was previously documented from other parts of Switzerland and from Austria [13,16,17]. St. John’s wort shows antidepressant, antibacterial, antiviral, antiproliferative, and anti-inflammatory properties, and the oil is recommended to treat wounds [41]. The wound- healing activity is supported by in vivo pharmacological studies [46,47]. St. John’s wort contains naphthodianthrons, flavonoids and tannins [41]. Page 20 of 22 In literature mainly preparations of the flowering herb and not only of the pure flowers are documented [41]. The flowers of Hypericum perforatum L. contain a higher percentage of the component Hyperforin, which shows antibiotic activities than the herb [48] or probably also than the blossoming St John’s wort tips [49]. This could explain the difference in the concentration compared with the literature (Table 5). Common spruce (Picea abies (L.) H. Karst.) Twigs of common spruce were directly fed to calves to treat or prevent cough and pneumonia. Ointments prepared from resin were used to treat skin afflictions and sores, mastitis, and respiratory tract diseases. To treat cough or pneumonia in calves, farmers rubbed ointment onto the chest of sick animals. Use of twigs of common spruce for treatment of respiratory tract diseases, and of resin to treat wounds has been presviously reported from other parts of Switzerland, and from Austria [13,14,16,17]. A mean concentration of 18.9 g dry plant equivalent/ 100 g finished product was documented (Table 5). No literature of recommended concentration of the resin was found. Linseeds (Linum usitatissimum L.) Linseeds were either used directly, or as infusions and decoctions. They were administered orally against gastrointestinal disorders, infertility, diseases of female genitals, and for general strengthening. Intravaginal/intrauterine administration was mentioned to treat inflammation of the uterus. Externally applied infusions and decoctions were used to treat injuries of the musculoskeletal system. Similar uses of linseed have been reported from Safiental, Austria, and Tuscany [11,13-15,17]. Linseeds contain mucilaginous polysaccharides which produce a protective and soothing layer on skin and mucous membranes. In veterinary medicine, linseeds are used as a mild laxative [41]. The dosages administered by the farmers interviewed in our study were higher than those reported in other surveys, or recommended daily dosages in veterinary medicine [16,41,42] (Table 4). Conclusions Farmers in north-eastern Switzerland possess traditional knowledge on medicinal plants and their uses in the treatment of livestock. We documented in our survey a wide spectrum of plant species, preparations, and uses. A considerable part of the documented remedies and their applications is in accordance with established pharmacological effects. Compared to ethnoveterinary studies previously conducted in other parts of Switzerland, and in Austria, similar plants and uses were found, but also additional plants and uses could be documented. The Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 interviewed farmers were mostly satisfied with the outcome of their applications. A continued documentation of traditional knowledge in other parts of Switzerland and Europe is needed. Page 21 of 22 7. 8. Additional file Additional file 1: List of remedies and their applications. Ethnoveterinary herbal remedies used by farmers in four north-eastern Swiss cantons (St. Gallen, Thurgau, Appenzell Innerrhoden and Appenzell Ausserrhoden). Abbreviation HSHR: Homemade single species herbal remedies. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Authors' contributions MD conducted all interviews of the project, entered the results into the database, performed the data analysis, and drafted the manuscript. Together with CV and BM, MW and FK designed the research strategy. SI created and took care of the project database. AT collected, processed and labeled the voucher specimens. MH, MW, CV, SI, FK and BM critically revised the manuscript for scientific content, and MH did the final language check. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Acknowledgements We thank all interview partners for generously sharing their knowledge about traditional animal health care. Financial support of the study by the organic advisory services of the cantons of Aargau and St. Gallen, the organic farmers associations “Bio Ostschweiz”, “Bio-Ring Appenzellerland”, and “Bio Fürstentum Liechtenstein”, the “Schweizerische Medizinische Gesellschaft für Phytotherapie” (www.smgp.ch), the Bristol Stiftung (Zurich) and the Paul Schiller Foundation (Zurich) are gratefully acknowledged, as well as Homöopharm AG, Oensingen, for the provision of herbal drugs. We thank Anne Isensee for preparing the Additional file 1. 14. 15. 16. 17. Author details 1 Institute of Pharmaceutical Biology, Departement of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland. 2Departement of Livestock Science, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, Ackerstrasse 113, Postfach, CH-5070 Frick, Switzerland. 3Division of Organic Farming, Department of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences (BOKU), Vienna, Austria. 4Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 5Unit of Phytopharmacy, Institute of Biotechnology, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Wädenswil, Switzerland. 20. Received: 11 October 2013 Accepted: 21 March 2014 Published: 31 March 2014 21. References 1. McCorkle CM: An Introduction to ethnoveterinary research and development. J Ethnobiol 1986, 6:129–149. 2. Pieroni A, Howard P, Volpato G, Santoro RF: Natural remedies and nutraceuticals used in ethnoveterinary practices in inland southern Italy. Vet Res Commun 2004, 28:55–80. 3. Nyamanga P, Suda C, Aagaard-Hansen J: The socio-cultural context and practical implications of ethnoveterinary medical pluralism in western Kenya. Agric Hum Values 2008, 25:513–527. 4. Akerreta S, Calvo MI, Cavero RY: Ethnoveterinary knowledge in Navarra (Iberian Peninsula). J Ethnopharmacol 2010, 130:369–378. 5. Benítez G, González-Tejero MR, Molero-Mesa J: Knowledge of ethnoveterinary medicine in the Province of Granada, Andalusia, Spain. J Ethnopharmacol 2012, 139:429–439. 6. Blanco E, Macı́a MJ, Morales R: Medicinal and veterinary plants of El Caurel (Galicia, northwest Spain). J Ethnopharmacol 1999, 65:113–124. 18. 19. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Bonet MÀ, Vallès J: Ethnobotany of Montseny biosphere reserve (Catalonia, Iberian Peninsula): plants used in veterinary medicine. J Ethnopharmacol 2007, 110:130–147. Pieroni A, Giusti ME, de Pasquale C, Lenzarini C, Censorii E, Gonzales-Tejero MR, Sanchez-Rojas CP, Ramiro-Gutierrez JM, Skoula M, Johnson C, Sarpaki A, Della A, Paraskeva-Hadijchambi D, Hadjichambis A, Hmamouchi M, El-Jorhi S, El-Demerdash M, El-Zayat M, Al-Shahaby O, Houmani Z, Scherazed M: Circum-Mediterranean cultural heritage and medicinal plant uses in traditional animal healthcare: a field survey in eight selected areas within the RUBIA project. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2006, 2:1–16. Scherrer AM, Motti R, Weckerle CS: Traditional plant use in the areas of Monte Vesole and Ascea, Cilento National Park (Campania, Southern Italy). J Ethnopharmacol 2005, 97:129–143. Viegi L, Pieroni A, Guarrera PM, Vangelisti R: A review of plants used in folk veterinary medicine in Italy as basis for a databank. J Ethnopharmacol 2003, 89:221–244. Uncini Manganelli RE, Camangi F, Tomei PE: Curing animals with plants: traditional usage in Tuscany (Italy). J Ethnopharmacol 2001, 78:171–191. Schunko C, Vogl CR: Organic farmers use of wild food plants and fungi in a hilly area in Styria (Austria). Journal of Ethnobiolology and Ethnomedicine 2010, 6:1–17. Grabowski M: "Meisterwurz und Aderlass" Anwendung und Wandel des ethnoveterinärmedizinischen Wissens im Grossen Walsertal/Voralberg unter Hervorhebung der pflanzlichen Hausmittel und des religiösen Brauchtums. In Diplomarbeit. Universität für Bodenkultur, Institut für ökologischen Landbau: Departement für Nachhaltige Agrarsysteme; 2010. Rudolph G: Lokales Erfahrungswissen von Biobäuerinnen und Biobauern in der West- und Südsteiermark über den Einsatz von Pflanzenarten und Hausmitteln in der Tierheilkunde im Vergleich zum Erfahrungswissen von Landwirten in den nördlich gemässigten Klimazonen. In Diplomarbeit. Universität für Bodenkultur Wien, Institut für ökologischen Landbau: Departement für Nachhaltige Agrarsysteme; 2008. Vogl-Lukasser B, Vogl CR, Bizaj M, Grasser S, Bertsch C: Lokales Erfahrungswissen über Pflanzenarten aus Wildsammlung mit Verwendung in der Fütterung und als Hausmittel in der Volksheilkunde bei landwirtschaftlichen Nutztieren in Osttirol. In Endbericht. Universität für Bodenkultur Wien, Institut für ökologischen Landbau: Departement für Nachhaltige Agrarsysteme; 2006. Schmid K, Ivemeyer S, Hamburger M, Vogl C, Klarer F, Meier B, Walkenhorst M: Traditional use of herbal remedies in livestock by farmers in three Swiss cantons (Aargau, Zurich and Schaffhausen). Forschende Komplementärmedizin 2012, 19:125–136. Joos B: Lokales Wissen über Gesundheit und Krankheit des Viehs in Graubünden. In Diplomarbeit. Universität für Bodenkultur Wien, Institut für ökologischen Landbau: Departement für Nachhaltige Agrarsysteme; 2010. WHO: Traditional medicine; 2012 [http://www.who.int/medicines/areas/ traditional/definitions/en/] Helmstädter A, Staiger C, Traditionelle Anwendung: Eine Betrachtung zu pflanzlichen Arzneimitteln aus pharmaziehistorischer Sicht. Forschende Komplementärmedizin 2012, 19:93–98. Anyniam C: Ecology and ethnomedicine: exploring links between current environmental crisis and indigenous medical practices. Soc Sci Med 1995, 40:321–329. Schweizerische Eidgenossenschaft: Verordnung über die biologische Landwirtschaft und die Kennzeichnung biologisch produzierter Erzeugnisse und Lebensmittel; 2012. [http://www.admin.ch/ch/d/sr/9/910.18.de.pdf]; Artikel 16. (5.6.2012). Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation (EEC). In [http://eur-lex.europa. eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:189:0001:0023:EN:PDF]; Article 14 (e) (ii). (5.6.2012). Klarer F, Häsler S, Marusic- Bubenhofer R, Meier B: Zulassungen pflanzlicher Tierarzneimittel in der Schweiz 1924–2011. Zeitschrift für Phytotherapie 2012, 33(Suppl.1):19–20. Documentation under [http://www.lsfm.zhaw.ch/? id=14419#108663] Tierarzneimittel Kompendium der Schweiz. In [http://www.vetpharm.uzh. ch/perldocs/index_t.htm]; (19.06.2012). Swiss map. In [http://map.geo.admin.ch/]; (23.5.2012). Schädler B, Weingartner R: Komponenten des natürlichen Wasserhaushaltes 1961–1990. In Hydrologischer Atlas der Schweiz HADES, Volume Tafel 6.3. Edited by (BAFU) BfS. Bern; 2002. Disler et al. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014, 10:32 http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/10/1/32 27. Bundesamt für Meteorologie und Klimatologie MeteoSchweiz: Standardnormwerte 1961–1990: Lufttemperatur 2m. In [www.meteoschweiz.admin.ch./web/de/klima/klima_schweiz]; (23.5.2012). 28. Bundesamt für Statistik. In [http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/de/index/ regionen/regionalportraets.html] (23.5.2012). 29. Schweizer Bauernverband. In [http://www.sbv-usp.ch/de/statistik/]; (24.1.2012). 30. Bernhard HR: Research Methods in Anthropology- Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. 4th edition. Walnut Creek, USA: Altamira Press; 2006. 31. Database SEP: Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, Microsoft Access (version; 2010. 32. Weller SC, Romney AK: Systematic Data Collection- Qualitative Research Methods Series, Volume 10. California: Sage Publications, Inc.; 1988. 33. Lauber K, Wagner G: Flora Helvetica. 4. Auflage. Bern- Stuttgart- Wien: Haupt Verlag; 2007. 34. European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines and HealthCare EDQM: European Pharmacopoeia. 7th edition; 2012. 35. Tierarzneimittel Kompendium der Schweiz: ATCvet Code. In [http://www. vetpharm.uzh.ch/tak/atcvet.htm]; (20.6.2012). 36. Ungemach FR: Umrechnung von Humandosierungen für Tiere. In Grundlagen der Pharmakotherapie bei Haus- und Nutztieren. 2. Auflage. Edited by Löscher W, Ungemach FR, Kroker R. Berlin und Hamburg: Verlag Paul Parey; 1994:400–401. 37. Sambraus HH: Atlas der Nutztierrassen, 250 Rassen in Wort und Bild. 5th edition. Stuttgart: Ulmer; 1996. 38. Schweizerische Eidgenossenschaft: Verordnung über landwirtschaftliche Begriffe und die Anerkennung von Betriebsformen (Landwirtschaftliche Begriffsverordnung, LBV). [www.admin.ch/ch/d/sr/9/910.91.de.pdf]; (5.6.2012). 39. Zealley AK, Aitken RCB: Measurement of mood. Proc R Soc Med 1969, 62:993–996. 40. Maphosa V, Masika PJ: Ethnoveterinary uses of medicinal plants: a survey of plants used in the ethnoveterinary control of gastro-intestinal parasites of goats in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. Pharm Biol 2010, 48:697–702. 41. Reichling J, Gachnian- Mirtscheva R, Frater- Schröder M, Saller R, Rabinovich MI, Widmaier W: Heilpflanzenkunde für die Veterinärparxis. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag; 2008. 42. ESCOP - The Scientific Foundation for Herbal Medicinal Products: ESCOP Monographs, completely revised and expanded. 2nd edition. Stuttgart: Georg Thieme Verlag; 2003. 43. Cemek M, Yilmaz E, Buyukokuroglu ME: Protective effect of Matricaria chamomilla on ethanol-induced acute gastric mucosal injury in rats. Pharm Biol 2010, 48:757–763. 44. Patrick KFM, Kumar S, Edwardson PAD, Hutchinson JJ: Induction of vascularisation by an aqueous extract of the flowers of Calendula officinalis L. the European marigold. Phytomedicine 1996, 3:11–18. 45. Fronza M, Heinzmann B, Hamburger M, Laufer S, Merfort I: Determination of the wound healing effect of Calendula extracts using the scratch assay with 3 T3 fibroblasts. J Ethnopharmacol 2009, 126:463–467. 46. Oztürk N, Korkmaz S, Oztürk Y: Wound-healing activity of St. John's Wort (Hypericum perforatum L.) on chicken embryonic fibroblasts. J Ethnopharmacol 2007, 111:33–39. 47. Süntar IP, Akkol EK, Yılmazer D, Baykal T, Kırmızıbekmez H, Alper M, Yeşilada E: Investigations on the in vivo wound healing potential of Hypericum perforatum L. J Ethnopharmacol 2010, 127:468–477. 48. Umek A, Kreft S, Kartnig T, Heydel B: Quantitative phytochemical analyses of six hypericum species growing in Slovenia. Planta Med 1999, 65:388–390. 49. Meier B: Herbal medicinal products of St John’s Wort: manufacturing and quality control. In Medicinal and Aromatic Plants – Industrial Profiles, Volume Volume Genus Hypericum. Edited by Ernst E. London, New York: Taylor&Francis; 2003:106–136. 50. Besra SE, Gomes A, Ganguly DK, Vedasiromoni JR: Antidiarrhoeal activity of hot water extract of black tea (Camellia sinensis). Phytother Res 2003, 17:380–384. Page 22 of 22 Submit your next manuscript to BioMed Central and take full advantage of: • Convenient online submission doi:10.1186/1746-4269-10-32 Cite this article as: Disler et al.: Ethnoveterinary herbal remedies used by farmers in four north-eastern Swiss cantons (St. Gallen, Thurgau, Appenzell Innerrhoden and Appenzell Ausserrhoden). Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2014 10:32. • Thorough peer review • No space constraints or color figure charges • Immediate publication on acceptance • Inclusion in PubMed, CAS, Scopus and Google Scholar • Research which is freely available for redistribution Submit your manuscript at www.biomedcentral.com/submit List of remedies and their applications Ethnoveterinary herbal remedies used by farmers in four north-eastern Swiss cantons (St. Gallen, Thurgau, Appenzell Innerrhoden and Appenzell Ausserrhoden) Onelineinthefollowingtablerepresentsoneapplication:[dialoguepartner]x[plantspecies]x[plantpart]x[manufacturingprocesstothefinishedproduct]x[categoryofuse]x[specificationofuse]x [animalspecies]x[animalageclassification]x[administrationprocedure].The[specificationofuse]isnotincludedintheadditionalfile1forspacereasons.Thisexplainsidenticallines. Listofabbreviations General: na=informationnotavailable Origin: bo=bought/crudedrug bo*=bought/commercialextractsandfinishedproducts cu=cultivated wh=wildharvesting vsno:NumberofHerbariumvoucher Extractionprocedureonfarm: none alcohol:(rt)=roomtemperature (et)=elevatedtemperature milk:(rt)=roomtemperature (et)=elevatedtemperature oil/fat:(rt)=roomtemperature (et)=elevatedtemperature water:(rt)=roomtemperature (dec)=decoction (inf)=infusion Administration exal=externaladministration,alteredorsoreskin (epicutan) (konj)=konjuntival exin=externaladministration,intactskin (epicutan) (konj)=konjunktival int=internaladministration (nasal) (oral) (vaut)=intravaginal/intrauterine tohe=treatmentofhousingenvironment Plantpart: bar=bark exc=excretions flo=flowersandinflorescenses fsb=fruits,seeds,berries her=wholeplantswithoutroots(herb) lea=leaves pet=petals rob=root/bulb twb=twigs,branches wpr=wholeplantswithroots Categoriesofuse: behav=behaviour gastr=gastrointestinaldisordersandmetabolicdysfunctions infer=infertilityanddiseasesoffemalegenitals mast=mastitis musc=musculoskeletalsystem para=parasites resp=respiratorytractdiseases sens=sensoryorgan skin=skinalterationsandsores streng=generalstrengthening varia=variousindications 0.75 Dailydosage[g/kg ] inplantequivalentperkgmetabolicbodyweight[g/kg0.75]; usedinformulationsfororaladministrationonly; tohe=treatmentofhousingenvironment RN=Recipenumber(startswith202) DP=Dialogpartner(startswith30) Animaltreated: nsas=nospecificationoftheanimalspecies(external administration) Conc[g/100g] Concentration[gdrugin100gfinishedproduct];usedin formulationsfortopicaltreatmentandintravaginal/intrauterine administration; da=directlyadministeredwithoutextraction,external administration tohe=treatmentofhousingenvironment Ver=Verificationofdosage ew=estimatedweightbyassessementofthevolumeand subsequentweighing od=originaldrugweightedonͲsite rd=referencedrugweightedonͲsite Botanicalfamily Plantspecies RecipenamedesignatedbyDP Plant part Origin Adoxaceae Sambucusnigra L. twb Amaranthaceae Betavulgarissubsp.vulgaris (conditivaͲgroup) Alliumcepa L. Holderstaude Holderstaude Holderstaude Holderstaude Holundertee Randenwickel Zwiebeln Zwiebeln Knoblauch Knoblauch KnoblauchͲWasser Knoblauch Kümmeltee Kümmeltee Kümmeltee Fencheltee PeterliͲTee SarnikelͲTinktur SanikelͲTee SarnikelͲTee Palmentee Palmentee Stechpalme Stechlaub Stechpalme Farn SchafgarbenͲTee SchafgarbenͲTee Arnikatinktur Arnikasalbe Arnikasalbe Arnikabalsam Arnikaöl Arnikaschnaps Arnikatinktur Arnikatinktur Arnikatinktur Arnikaschnaps Arnikatinktur Arnikatinktur Arnikasalbe Amaryllidaceae Alliumsativum L. Apiaceae Carumcarvi L. Foeniculumvulgare Mill. Petroselinumcrispum (Mill.)Fuss Saniculaeuropaea L. Aquifoliaceae Aspidiaceae Asteraceae Ilexaquifolium L. DryopterisfilixͲmas L.(Schott) Achilleamillefolium L. Arnicachamissonis Less. Arnicamontana L. Categoriesof use Animaltreated Administration Dailydosage Conc [g/kg0.75] [g/100g] Ver RN DP wh Extraction procedureon farm none gastr cattle int(oral) rob cu water(inf) none infer musc cattle cattle int(oral) exin(epicutan) na na na na 0.02 na na na na ew na 705 704 582 264 426 269 47 46 65 34 61 35 rob cu none rob bo fsb cu bo milk(rt) none water(rt) none water(dec) resp streng para para para para gastr fsb her her wh bo cu wh water(inf) water(inf) water(inf) alcohol(rt) water(inf) lea wh water(dec) gastr gastr infer skin infer skin resp twb wh none para calf cattle calf hen cattle,calf hen calf cattle cattle calf cattle cattle,calf cattle cattle calf cattle calf her flo wh bo none water(inf) para gastr flo cu alcohol(rt) oil/fat(rt) skin skin cattle,calf calf cattle cattle cattle,calf int(nasal) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) exin(epicutan) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) exal(epicutan) int(vaut) exal(epicutan) int(oral) int(oral) tohe tohe tohe tohe int(oral) int(oral) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) flo bo* none musc cattle,calf exin(epicutan) wh alcohol(rt) musc cattle nsas cattle exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) cattle,calf nsas exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) nsas exin(epicutan) na ew od ew ew ew od rd rd rd ew od na od ew ew na na na na od od ew ew ew na na ew ew ew ew ew ew ew od 281 302 548 318 610 312 675 544 429 321 342 278 209 279 679 679 282 358 454 364 701 701 569 570 570 297 617 542 638 391 391 655 341 341 639 36 39 73 40 54 39 48 73 61 43 45 36 30 36 48 48 36 46 66 51 47 47 68 68 68 37 54 73 52 57 57 51 45 45 52 skin oil/fat(rt) musc da na 1.63 1.76 1.5 na 0.15 0.1 3.15 0.14 0.11 0.59 0.03 0.01 na 0.1 0.01 0.01 tohe tohe tohe tohe 0.53 0.19 tohe tohe tohe tohe 0.23 2 2 na na 2.33 0.9 1.14 1.14 0.91 1.96 1.96 10 Botanicalfamily Plantspecies RecipenamedesignatedbyDP Plant part Origin Asteraceae Calendulaofficinalis L. Ringelblumensalbe Calendulasalbe Calendulasalbe Calendulatinktur Calendulatinktur Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumentinktur Calendulatinktur Ringelblumentinktur Ringelblumenschnaps Ringelblumentinktur Ringelblumentinktur Ringelblumentinktur Calendulatinktur Ringelblumenschnaps Ringelblumentinktur Ringelblumentinktur Ringelblumentinktur Ringelblumentinktur Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumenöl Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumentee Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumensalbe Ringelblumentee Ringelblumentee Ringelblumentee Ringelblumentee Ringelblumentee Ringelblumentee flo bo* Extraction procedureon farm none cu alcohol(rt) oil/fat(et) oil/fat(rt) pet cu Categoriesof use Animaltreated Administration skin calf cattle exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) nsas cattle calf exal(epicutan) int(vaut) exal(epicutan) cattle exal(epicutan) cattle,calf exal(epicutan) cattle cattle,calf exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) nsas nsas cattle exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) cattle,calf exal(epicutan) nsas exal(epicutan) nsas cattle cattle,calf exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) horse calf cattle exal(epicutan) int(oral) exal(epicutan) horse nsas rabbit exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) infer skin skin musc skin water(inf) oil/fat(rt) skin skin water(inf) gastr skin Dailydosage Conc [g/kg0.75] [g/100g] na na na na na na na 2.5 0.38 0.34 0.91 0.03 0.34 0.43 2.33 0.91 0.01 0.01 0.34 0.34 0.28 1.82 0.28 0.28 3.27 1.73 1.82 1.82 0.34 0.34 2.22 1.87 0.5 1.52 0.1 1.22 1.76 1.22 1.22 0.71 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Ver RN DP na na na na na na na ew ew ew ew ew ew ew ew ew ew ew ew ew ew od ew ew od ew od od ew ew ew ew ew ew ew ew ew ew ew rd rd rd rd rd rd 597 690 690 691 691 410 410 367 672 219 654 277 219 496 672 654 367 367 219 219 220 436 220 220 274 344 374 374 276 276 607 394 587 448 389 320 563 320 320 319 319 319 319 319 319 58 46 46 46 46 60 60 54 48 32 51 36 32 72 48 51 54 54 32 32 32 62 32 32 35 45 56 56 36 36 54 57 59 66 59 43 68 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 Botanicalfamily Plantspecies RecipenamedesignatedbyDP Plant part Origin Asteraceae Helianthusannuus L. Speiseöl Speiseöl Speiseöl Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillenspülung Kamillenspülung Kamillentee KamillenteemitSoda Kamillentee SchmierseifeundKamillenbad Kamillenabsud Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillosan® Kamillosan® Kamillencreme Kamillensalbe Kamillencreme Kamillensalbe Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee Kamillentee AlpenkreuzkrautͲTee AlpenkreuzkrautͲTee Buzlentee fsb bo Extraction procedureon farm none flo bo water(inf) Matricariarecutita L.(vsno:71204) Matricariarecutita L.(vsno:71204) Senecioalpinus (L.) Scop(vsno:71219) Categoriesof use Animaltreated Administration mast para skin gastr cattle cattle,calf cattle,calf calf exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) int(oral) infer cattle cattle int(oral) int(vaut) younggoat cattle cattle,calf exal(konj) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) sens skin bo* none skin nsas calf exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) cu oil/fat(rt) skin calf exal(epicutan) cattle,calf exal(epicutan) gastr calf int(oral) infer skin cattle cattle calf cattle int(oral) int(vaut) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) int(oral) exal(epicutan) water(inf) wh water(inf) skin na bo water(inf) gastr cattle nsas calf her wh water(inf) skin cattle Dailydosage Conc [g/kg0.75] [g/100g] na na na 5.88 0.79 0.35 0.16 0.53 0.16 1.94 0.75 0.3 0.2 0.9 0.4 0.04 5 0.37 0.4 na na 2.12 5.65 2.12 5.65 0.12 2 0.47 0.17 0.85 0.18 0.85 0.4 0.23 0.23 0.68 1.32 na na na Ver RN DP na na na od od od od ew ew od od ew rd od od od od ew od na na ew ew ew ew ew rd od od rd od rd rd rd rd od od na na na 202 202 202 380 697 674 651 535 512 380 652 549 206 604 495 545 381 564 495 354 257 661 660 661 660 397 290 585 350 290 659 290 445 428 428 335 335 492 472 419 30 30 30 56 47 48 51 73 71 56 51 73 30 58 72 73 56 68 72 46 34 50 50 50 50 57 37 65 45 37 50 37 64 61 61 44 44 67 69 60 Botanicalfamily Plantspecies RecipenamedesignatedbyDP Plant part Origin Asteraceae Senecioovatus Willd. HeidnischWundkraut HeidnischWundkraut HeidnischWundkraut HeidnischWundkrautͲTee HeidnischWundkraut HeidnischWundkrautͲSalbe HeidnischWundkrautͲSalbe HeidnischWundkrautͲSalbe Goldrutencreme Goldrutencreme Mutterkraut RainfarnͲTee BirkenrindenͲTee Beinwell Beinwell Wallwurz WallwurzͲEmulsion BeinwellͲTinktur BeinwellͲSalbe WallwurzͲSalbe WallwurzͲSalbe WallwurzͲSalbe BeinwellͲTinktur BeinwellͲTinktur WallwurzͲSchnaps BeinwellͲTinktur Beinwell Wallwurz Wallwurz Beinwell Rapsöl&Schnaps Rapsöl&Schnaps Rapsöl Schwefelblüten&Rapsöl Kabisblatt Kohl Kohl Kohl Kohl HirtentäschliͲTee her her Solidagovirgaurea L.s.str. Betulaceae Boraginaceae Brassicaceae Tanacetumparthenium (L.)Sch.Bip. Tanacetumvulgare L. Betulapendula Roth Symphytumofficinale L. (vsͲno:71205) Brassicanapus L. Brassicaoleracea L. CapsellabursaͲpastoris (L.)Medik Categoriesof use Animaltreated Administration cu wh Extraction procedureon farm water(inf) water(inf) skin skin nsas cattle,calf exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) bo* none skin nsas cattle exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) wh oil/fat(rt) skin cattle,calf cattle exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) her her bar lea cu wh bo cu none water(inf) water(dec) none varia para infer musc rob wh bo* cu none none alcohol(rt) oil/fat(et) musc musc skin musc skin musc rabbit cattle,calf cattle cattle,calf goat nsas cattle,calf calf nsas nsas cattle cattle,calf cattle cattle int(oral) exin(epicutan) int(oral) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) skin nsas cattle cattle,calf nsas nsas calf cattle calf cattle,calf cattle cattle,calf cattle exal(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) int(oral) int(oral) exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) varia nsas cattle exal(epicutan) int(oral) oil/fat(rt) wh fsb lea her bo cu wh alcohol(rt) mast musc none skin musc none skin gastr none para skin musc water(rt) Dailydosage Conc [g/kg0.75] [g/100g] na na na na na na na na na na na na na da da da na 4.43 6.35 6.67 1.82 3.45 8.33 8.33 3.51 4.26 da da da da 7.84 0.78 da da da da da da da 0.05 Ver RN DP na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na od od od od ew ew ew ew ew na na na na od od na na na na na na na rd 640 425 382 680 425 646 646 646 663 663 331 458 601 261 261 592 222 517 352 633 383 562 270 270 657 581 706 656 591 580 602 602 283 702 271 658 658 265 634 489 52 61 56 48 61 51 51 51 50 50 43 66 58 34 34 59 32 71 45 52 56 68 35 35 51 65 47 51 59 65 58 58 36 47 35 51 51 34 52 67 Botanicalfamily Plantspecies RecipenamedesignatedbyDP Plant part Origin Cannabaceae Chenopodiaceae Cupressaceae Cannabissativa L. ChenopodiumbonusͲhenricus L. Juniperuscommunis L.s.str Futterhanf Wundsalbe Wacholdersalbe Wacholdersalbe Wachholder Wachholder ThujaͲTee ThujaͲTee KatzenschwanzͲTee Heidelbeersaft HeidelbeerstaudenͲTee Wundklee Eichenrindenpulver Eichenrindentee Eichenrindentee Eichenrindentee Eichenrinde Enzianschnaps Storchenschnabel Storchenschnabelsalbe Storchenschnabeltinktur Storchenschnabel Storchenschnabelcreme Storchenschnabelsalbe Storchenschnabelsalbe Storchenschnabelsalbe Storchenschnabelsalbe Pelargo® her lea twb bo wh wh Thujaoccidentalis L. Equisetaceae Ericaceae Equisetumarvense L. Vacciniummyrtillus L. Fabaceae Anthyllisvulneraria L.s.str. Gentianaceae Geraniaceae Gentianalutea L. Geraniumrobertianum L.s.str. (vsno:71213,71220) Pelargoniumsidoides DC twb her fsb twb flo bar rob her rob cu wh wh wh wh wh bo wh wh bo cu wh bo* Extraction procedureon farm none oil/fat(rt) alcohol(rt) alcohol(rt) none Categoriesof use Animaltreated Administration Dailydosage Conc [g/kg0.75] [g/100g] Ver RN DP streng skin mast musc streng cattle nsas cattle cattle cattle,calf int(oral) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exin(epicutan) tohe na water(inf) water(inf) water(inf) water(dec) water(dec) water(inf) none water(dec) infer infer gastr gastr gastr skin gastr gastr alcohol(rt) none oil/fat(rt) alcohol(rt) none oil/fat(et) infer skin gastr infer skin behav infer skin cattle cattle calf calf calf cattle calf calf cattle cattle cattle calf cattle nsas cattle cattle cattle,calf cattle cattle,calf int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) exal(epicutan) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(vaut) exal(epicutan) int(oral) int(oral) exal(epicutan) int(oral) int(oral) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) none resp dog calf exal(epicutan) int(oral) na na na na na na ew na ew na ew na od rd od od na ew od ew ew rd od ew ew ew ew na 650 456 395 395 453 453 409 558 642 511 681 431 372 474 405 678 444 476 465 451 396 641 516 568 568 568 328 254 51 66 57 57 66 66 57 73 52 71 48 61 55 69 57 48 64 69 69 66 57 52 71 68 68 68 43 34 tohe tohe 0.01 na 0.07 na 0.47 na na na tohe tohe na 0.78 0.08 0.05 0.8 na 0.03 0.11 0.9 0.001 0.02 0.94 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.71 na Botanicalfamily Plantspecies RecipenamedesignatedbyDP Plant part Origin Hypericaceae Hypericumperforatum L. (vsno:71202,71216,71223) JohanniskrautͲÖl Johannisöl Johannisöl Johannisöl Johannisöl Johannisöl Johannisöl Johannisöl Johannissalbe Johannisöl Johannisöl Johannisöl Johannisöl Johannisöl Johannistinktur JohanniskrautinOlivenöl JohanniskrautͲÖl Johannisöl JohanniskrautͲÖl Johannisöl Johannistinktur Nussbaumblätter Lavendelsträusschen Lavendelöl Lavendelöl NPJLiniment® OPIFIX® OPIFIX® Pfefferminztee Pfefferminztee Salbei Salbei Salbeitee ätherischesÖlThymian Zimt flo bo* Extraction procedureon farm none cu oil/fat(rt) Juglandaceae Lamiaceae Juglansregia L. Lavandulaangustifolia Mill. Menthacanadensis L. Salviaofficinalis L. Lauraceae Thymusvulgaris L. Cinnamomumverum J.Presl wh oil/fat(rt) Categoriesof use Animaltreated Administration musc skin cattle calf infer musc skin cattle cattle nsas calf cattle exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) int(vaut) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) cattle,calf exal(epicutan) cattle cattle cattle nsas cattle int(vaut) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) cattle,calf exal(epicutan) calf nsas cattle,calf cattle,calf cattle tohe tohe exal(epicutan) tohe exin(epicutan) infer mast musc skin lea her wh cu none none oil/fat(rt) lea bo* none para para skin streng mast na bo water(inf) musc gastr cattle calf exin(epicutan) int(oral) lea cu none lea her bar cu bo* bo water(inf) none none resp skin gastr resp gastr calf rabbit calf calf calf int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(nasal) int(oral) Dailydosage Conc [g/kg0.75] [g/100g] tohe tohe tohe 0.62 1.24 0.02 na 0.02 na 0.24 na na na na 0.76 1.49 0.76 2 0.66 2 2 2 3 3 1.89 1.43 1.96 3 1.96 0.62 1.89 tohe tohe 9.09 tohe na na na Ver RN DP na na na na ew ew ew ew ew ew ew od od od ew ew ew od ew ew ew na na ew ew na na na od od ew na ew na ew 497 596 596 596 387 346 387 612 390 612 612 376 518 518 427 262 481 518 481 590 427 653 332 613 613 296 339 339 334 334 285 329 636 253 553 72 58 58 58 57 45 57 54 57 54 54 56 71 71 61 34 69 71 69 59 61 51 43 54 54 37 44 44 44 44 36 43 52 34 73 Botanicalfamily Plantspecies RecipenamedesignatedbyDP Plant part Origin Linaceae Linumusitatissimum L. Leinsamen Leinsamen Leinsamenschleim Leinsamenschleim Leinsamenschleim Leinsamentee Leinsamen Leinsamenmus Leinsamenschleim Leinsamenschleim Leinsamenschleim Leinsamenschleimspülung Leinsamenschleim Bärlapp Eibischblätter Chäslichrut Chäslichrut Malventee Malventee ChäslichrutͲSalbe ChäslichrutͲSalbe ChäslichrutͲSalbe Chäslichrut ChäslichrutͲTee ChäslichrutͲsalbe ChäslichrutͲSalbe ChäslichrutͲBad ChäslichrutͲTee Chäslichrut Chäslichrut ChäslichrutͲTee ChäslichrutͲBad ChäslichrutͲBad ChäslichrutͲBad ChäslichrutͲTee ChäslichrutͲTee ChäslichrutͲTee Lindenbast Lindenbast LindenbastͲTee LindenrindenͲTee Lindenbast Muskatnuss Muskatnuss fsb bo Lycopodiaceae Malvaceae Lycopodiumclavatum L. Althaeaofficinalis L. MalvaneglectaWallr. (vsno:71212) Tiliacordata Mill. Myristicaceae Myristicafragrans Houtt. Extraction procedureon farm none water(dec) her lea flo her wh wh wh bo cu wh fsb Animaltreated Administration Dailydosage Conc [g/kg0.75] [g/100g] Ver RN DP infer streng gastr cattle cattle calf int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) cattle int(oral) 0.62 1.57 4.21 4.21 15.69 10.97 0.78 7.78 7.78 1.62 1.62 cattle cattle cattle,calf cattle cattle,calf cattle cattle horse cattle int(vaut) exin(epicutan) tohe exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) cattle,calf cattle cattle,calf cattle,calf cattle calf exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) cattle exal(epicutan) cattle,calf horse cattle nsas cattle cattle exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(vaut) int(oral) ew od rd rd od od od od od rd rd rd od na na ew rd od od od od na na od od od na na od od na na na na na na na od od na na na ew ew 599 309 584 584 527 214 508 379 700 584 584 242 310 204 392 430 499 323 323 375 375 566 662 565 434 434 433 696 298 298 696 433 433 217 696 635 635 373 414 600 677 252 408 236 58 39 65 65 70 31 71 56 47 65 65 33 39 30 57 61 72 43 43 56 56 68 50 68 62 62 62 47 37 37 47 62 62 31 47 52 52 55 60 58 48 33 57 33 none water(inf) water(inf) water(inf) water(inf) water(inf) oil/fat(rt) infer musc musc skin skin skin skin skin skin water(inf) skin oil/fat(et) oil/fat(et) water(inf) musc skin skin water(rt) bar Categoriesof use bo none water(dec) skin skin infer infer wh water(dec) infer cattle bo none gastr cattle tohe 2.22 20 tohe na 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 1.82 1.82 na na 0.4 1.82 1.82 na na 0.8 0.8 na na na na na na na 0.19 0.13 na na na 0.05 0.05 Botanicalfamily Plantspecies RecipenamedesignatedbyDP Plant part Origin Myrtaceae Melaleucaalternifolia Maiden&BetcheexCheel Teebaumöl Teebaumöl Teebaumöl Eschenlaub Esche OlivenölundEigelb LäusekrautͲTee WeisstannenͲÄste Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Tannenharz Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Harzsalbe Harzsalbe RottannenͲÄste RottannenͲZweige Tannenäste Tannenäste RottannenͲÄste Augentrost Spitzwegerich SpitzwegerichͲÖl Haferschleimsuppe Hafer Haferwickel lea bo* Oleaceae Fraxinusexcelsior L. Orobanchaceae Pinaceae Oleaeuropaea L. Pedicularisverticillata L. Abiesalba Mill. Piceaabies (L.)H.Karst. Plantaginaceae Poaceae Euphrasiaofficinalis L. Plantagolanceolata L.(vsno:71211) Avenasativa L.s.str. na lea twb fsb her twb exc Extraction procedureon farm none bo* wh wh bo wh wh bo none none none none water(inf) none oil/fat(et) wh none oil/fat(et) Categoriesof use Animaltreated Administration skin streng mast para streng mast para streng mast resp skin skin mast nsas nsas cattle calf cattle cattle cattle,calf cattle,calf cattle calf cattle cattle,calf cattle exal(epicutan) tohe exin(epicutan) int(oral) int(oral) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) int(oral) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exin(epicutan) resp skin calf calf cattle exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) cattle,calf int(oral) exal(epicutan) twb wh none resp nsas calf exal(epicutan) int(oral) her lea wh wh fsb bo cu water(inf) none oil/fat(rt) water(dec) none water(dec) streng sens resp mast gastr streng resp cattle,calf cattle,calf calf cattle calf cattle calf int(oral) exal(konj) int(oral) exin(epicutan) int(oral) int(oral) exin(epicutan) Dailydosage Conc [g/kg0.75] [g/100g] tohe na tohe na na na da na na na na na da 3.53 27.27 27.27 27.27 3.53 27.27 27.27 31.75 na na na 27.27 27.27 12.93 31.75 na na na na na 1 0.12 0.32 5.6 0.31 na Ver RN DP na na na na na na na na na na na na od od od od od od od od na na na od od od od na na na na na od ew ew ew ew na 255 255 340 473 463 406 459 683 377 377 377 478 515 432 432 432 515 432 432 343 432 480 480 432 432 393 343 645 288 484 440 682 461 280 326 503 227 266 34 34 44 69 66 57 66 48 56 56 56 69 71 62 62 62 71 62 62 45 62 69 69 62 62 57 45 51 36 69 62 48 66 36 43 72 33 34 Botanicalfamily Plantspecies RecipenamedesignatedbyDP Plant part Origin Polygonaceae Rumexobtusifolius L. (vsno:71208,71218) Blacke Blacke Blacke Blacke Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackensalbe Blackenöl Blackensalbe Blackensalbe BlackenwurzelͲTee BlackenwurzelͲTee BlackenwurzelͲTee Blackentee Blackentee Blackentee Kreuzdorn Kreuzdorn Kreuzdorn FrauenmänteliͲTee FrauenmänteliͲTee Weissdorn Weissdorn Weissdorn Weissdorn Apfel lea wh Rhamnaceae Rhamnuscathartica L. Rosaceae Alchemillavulgaris L.Agg. Crataeguslaevigata (Poiret)DC. Malusdomesticus Borkh. Extraction procedureon farm none Categoriesof use Animaltreated Administration musc cattle,calf goat horse nsas cattle exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exin(epicutan) cattle cattle,calf cattle cattle,calf exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) nsas cattle cattle exal(epicutan) exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) musc cattle cattle,calf exin(epicutan) exin(epicutan) skin varia cattle cattle,calf nsas cattle exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) exin(epicutan) skin oil/fat(et) mast musc skin oil/fat(rt) varia mast rob wh water(dec) gastr calf int(oral) wpr wh water(inf) skin gastr twb wh none skin cattle,calf calf youngpig cattle,calf exal(epicutan) int(oral) int(oral) tohe her wh water(inf) infer cattle int(oral) twb wh none skin cattle,calf tohe fruits cu none gastr cattle int(oral) Dailydosage Conc [g/kg0.75] [g/100g] da da da da 3.64 1.82 3.08 20 3.08 2.77 3.59 1.82 2.77 3.64 10 1.98 1.52 1.98 1.52 1.52 1.75 1.52 10 2.33 2 1.98 0.82 1.18 3.15 0.73 0.78 1.32 tohe tohe tohe 0.03 0.03 tohe tohe tohe tohe na tohe tohe tohe tohe tohe tohe tohe Ver RN DP na na na na od od od od od od ew od od od od ew ew ew ew ew ew ew od ew ew ew ew ew od ew ew ew na na na ew ew na na na na na 260 260 325 424 514 435 215 403 215 275 648 435 275 514 631 561 483 561 483 460 324 483 631 614 611 561 348 207 355 583 423 423 468 359 286 488 488 504 466 314 287 233 34 34 43 61 71 62 31 57 31 35 51 62 35 71 52 68 69 68 69 66 43 69 52 54 54 68 45 30 46 65 61 61 69 46 36 67 67 72 69 39 36 33 Botanicalfamily Plantspecies RecipenamedesignatedbyDP Plant part Origin Rosaceae Potentillaerecta (L.)Raeusch. (vsno:71201) BlutwurzͲTinktur Blutwurz BlutwurzͲTee BlutwurzͲTinktur BlutwurzͲTinktur Zwetschgensteine Schwarzdorn Schwarzdorn Schwarzdorn Himbeerstauden KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps schwarzerKaffee KaffeeͲSchnaps KaffeeͲSchnaps Zitronensaft Salweidenzweige Fliegenholz Kartoffelsalbe Kartoffelsalbe Kartoffelsalbe Kartoffelsalbe Schwarztee Schwarztee Schwarztee Schwarztee Schwarztee Schwarztee Schwarztee Kapuzinerkresse na rob bo* bo Extraction procedureon farm none water(dec) wh alcohol(rt) fsb twb cu wh twb fsb wh bo Prunusdomestica L. Prunusspinosa L. Rubiaceae Rutaceae Salicaceae Simaroubaceae Solanaceae Rubusidaeus L. Coffea L. Citrusxlimon (L.)Burm.f. Salixcaprea L. Quassiaamara L. Solanumtuberosum L. Theaceae Camelliasinensis (L.)Kuntze Tropaeolaceae Tropaeolummajus L. fsb twb bar rob bo wh bo cu Categoriesof use Animaltreated Administration Dailydosage Conc [g/kg0.75] [g/100g] Ver RN DP gastr gastr calf cattle int(oral) int(oral) none none gastr streng para skin calf calf pig cattle,calf int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) tohe none water(inf) streng gastr cattle calf cattle int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) exal(epicutan) exal(epicutan) na 0.11 0.44 0.004 0.004 na tohe tohe tohe na 0.04 0.45 0.51 0.06 1.06 0.13 0.09 0.71 0.07 0.19 0.19 0.04 0.45 0.31 0.31 1.58 0.11 0.06 0.47 na na od od ew ew na na na na na ew od ew ew ew od rd ew od od od od od od od od ew od od na na ew ew ew ew ew rd od ew ew od od na 224 507 213 477 477 250 586 556 467 462 593 684 578 573 543 519 500 494 439 413 413 398 360 303 294 317 593 211 416 235 315 401 401 402 402 536 446 404 336 322 273 273 330 32 71 31 69 69 33 65 73 69 66 59 46 65 68 73 71 72 70 62 60 60 57 47 39 37 40 59 30 60 33 40 57 57 57 57 73 64 57 44 43 35 35 43 none none alcohol(rt) oil/fat(et) infer gastr gastr skin skin rabbit youngsheep cattle calf cattle donkey cattle oil/fat(rt) skin cattle exal(epicutan) lea bo water(inf) gastr calf int(oral) flo wh none streng dog horse int(oral) int(oral) tohe tohe tohe na 5 5 1.72 1.72 0.53 0.56 0.12 1.74 0.71 0.62 0.18 na Botanicalfamily Plantspecies RecipenamedesignatedbyDP Plant part Origin Urticaceae Urticadioica L. (vsno:71209,71210,71217) Brennnessel Brennnessel Brennnessel Brennnessel Brennnessel Brennnessel Brennnessel Brennnessel Brennnessel Brennnessel Brennnessel Brennnessel Brennnessel Brennnessel Brennnessel Brennnesseln BrennnesselͲTee BrennnesselͲTee BrennnesselͲTee BrennnesselͲTee Brennnessel BrennnesselͲTee BrennnesselͲTee BrennnesselͲTee BrennnesselͲTee BrennnesselͲTee BrennnesselͲTee BrennnesselͲTee BrennnesselͲTee her wh Extraction procedureon farm none water(inf) Categoriesof use Animaltreated Administration Dailydosage Conc [g/kg0.75] [g/100g] Ver RN DP behav gastr infer pig cattle donkey goat sheep cattle skin streng donkey cattle int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) goat int(oral) hen horse cattle calf int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) int(oral) cattle int(oral) infer cattle int(oral) skin streng goat pig nsas cattle int(oral) int(oral) exal(epicutan) int(oral) 1.05 na 0.79 na na 0.02 0.03 na na na na 0.9 na na na 0.26 0.55 2.21 0.22 0.96 0.16 0.1 0.02 0.22 0.26 0.53 0.06 ew na ew na na ew ew na na na na ew na na na ew ew ew ew od ew ew ew ew ew ew ew ew ew 399 238 316 365 365 447 216 316 485 347 258 411 258 347 258 649 630 388 630 386 498 259 575 531 363 259 575 422 595 57 33 40 52 52 65 31 40 69 45 34 61 34 45 34 51 52 58 52 56 72 34 65 73 50 34 65 61 58 Varia gastr 0.24 0.43