Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Examines local fish names in fishing villages, revealing differences in naming conventions among communities.
Background Chilika Lagoon, India, is a biodiversity hotspot that is home to over 200 fish species and supports the livelihoods of over 400 000 fishers. A detailed record of fish names was previously undertaken; however, our initial field observations revealed differences in fish naming from those documented in the literature. Methods This study examines local nomenclature of Chilika fishes in greater detail, with an emphasis on intra-cultural variation in fisher knowledge by taking an age-gender-village approach. Fieldwork was executed in three fishing villages across the lagoon by showing 56 colour photos of important fish to 108 local community members. Within each village, an equal number of respondents were selected across each of the three age groups and genders. The local name was documented for each fish, and the responses were analyzed according to age, gender, and village. Results Across all photos, a total of 753 unique names were recorded, with many of these names attributed to phonetic differences. No notable age and gender differences in fish identification exist, except men were able to identify several fishes with higher success than women, and differences in fish naming exist across the three villages. Conclusions This study revealed that the local names ascribed to Chilika fish were more extensive than documented in previous literature. This study emphasizes the importance of surveying basin-wide to capture the range of names associated with each fish species.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Serrao et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: