Vernacular Taxonomy, Classification
and Varietal Diversity of fig (Ficus carica
L.) Among Jbala cultivators in Northern
Morocco
Y. Hmimsa, Y. Aumeeruddy-Thomas &
M. Ater
Human Ecology
An Interdisciplinary Journal
ISSN 0300-7839
Hum Ecol
DOI 10.1007/s10745-012-9471-x
1 23
Your article is protected by copyright and
all rights are held exclusively by Springer
Science+Business Media, LLC. This e-offprint
is for personal use only and shall not be selfarchived in electronic repositories. If you
wish to self-archive your work, please use the
accepted author’s version for posting to your
own website or your institution’s repository.
You may further deposit the accepted author’s
version on a funder’s repository at a funder’s
request, provided it is not made publicly
available until 12 months after publication.
1 23
Author's personal copy
Hum Ecol
DOI 10.1007/s10745-012-9471-x
Vernacular Taxonomy, Classification and Varietal Diversity
of fig (Ficus carica L.) Among Jbala cultivators
in Northern Morocco
Y. Hmimsa & Y. Aumeeruddy-Thomas & M. Ater
# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012
Introduction
Interactions between societies and their natural environment
have led to the development of complex traditional agroecosystems with a high level of agrodiversity (Brookfield
2001) linked to landscape mosaics which favour sustainability (Perfecto and Vandermeer 2010). In the Mediterranean
region, ecological and evolutionary interactions since the
Neolithic between humans and biodiversity have produced
coupled bio-cultural landscapes (Blondel 2006). Domestication in that region took place through selection of biological
traits for a large diversity of crops including cereals, pulses
and trees (Zohary and Spiegel-Roy 1975). Crop intraspecific
diversity in traditional farming systems contributes to risk
avoidance strategies through the selection of adapted agronomic properties. Crop diversity also relates to sociocultural
values and functions such as food preferences, ceremonial
uses, identity or patrimony (Gibson 2009; Heckler and Zent
2008), as well as levels of interest within each society
among individuals (Emperaire and Peroni 2007) and the
reproductive biology of specific crops. Mediterranean fruit
trees are allogamous and vegetative propagation is a major
Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article
(doi:10.1007/s10745-012-9471-x) contains supplementary material,
which is available to authorized users.
Y. Hmimsa : M. Ater
University Abdelmalek Essaadi,
Tétouan, Morocco
Y. Aumeeruddy-Thomas (*)
Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive, CNRS UMR 5175,
Montpellier, France
e-mail: yildiz.thomas@cefe.cnrs.fr
method for selecting and maintaining advantageous traits
(Zohary and Spiegel-Roy 1975).
Feral or wild crop relatives of Ficus carica, Olea europaea or Castanea sativa are preserved in traditional agroecosystems for a variety of purposes ranging from religious
to practical uses, favoring gene flow between the wild or
feral and clonally propagated varieties. Sexual recombinations between wild, feral and clonally propagated varieties
favor the emergence of new varieties (Aumeeruddy-Thomas
2010; Aumeeruddy-Thomas et al. 2012). Studies pertaining
to other vegetatively propagated crops, especially tubers in
tropical regions, demonstrate the complementary role of
vegetative and sexual reproduction in producing new cultivars (Caillon et al. 2006; McKey et al. 2010).
In the Mediterranean region, figs, olives, dates, grapes
and almonds were the first perennial plant species to be
domesticated (Zohary and Hopf 2000). Compared to the
roles of cereals the importance of tree interspecific and
intraspecific diversity for the development of Mediterranean
societies has been little discussed (Bouby and Ruas 2012).
The existence of 1275 olive cultivars described to date in the
Mediterranean region (Bartolini et al. 1998) shows the importance of olive intraspecific diversity at the regional level.
In Morocco, 194 fig and 60 olive genotypes are known
(Khadari et al. 2008b; Achtak et al. 2010). Intraspecific
diversity of fruit trees in the Mediterranean region has been
attributed to their cultural, economic and religious importance since ancient times. Condit (1947) monograph on the
fig provides a comprehensive account of the importance
of Ficus carica in legends and folklore. The sociocultural
importance of fruit trees is discussed by numerous authors in
classical texts on agronomy (e.g., Plinius Natural History and
Columnella De Re Rustica) and in historical and ethnobotanical studies (Gsell 1914; Bellakhdar 2003). Nevertheless, no
comprehensive study examines the underlying sociocultural
Author's personal copy
Hum Ecol
processes and concrete practices supporting the existence of
intraspecific tree agrodiversity in contemporary Mediterranean
societies.
We examine cultivation in northern Morocco of Ficus
carica, the Mediterranean fig, one of the earliest trees to
have been domesticated in Eastern Mediterranean region
(Zohary and Hopf 2000). Kislev et al. (2006) trace fig
domestication to 11000 B.P. in the Eastern Mediterranean
region, suggesting that easy propagation of fig trees by
cuttings would have facilitated early domestication. Ficus
carica is naturally distributed around the Mediterranean
Basin. It is a dioecious tree that has a specific interaction
with Blastophaga psenes L., a pollinating wasp that completes part of its life cycle in the male fig (Kjellberg et al.
1987), as well as a specific parasite (Philotrypesis caricae L.)
(Joseph 1958). Some fig varieties produce two crops, a first
crop of parthenocarpic figs in spring and parthenocarpic or
non-parthenocarpic figs in summer-autumn while other varieties produce only one summer-autumn crop. Parthenocarpy
is known to be a syndrome of domestication for Ficus carica.
Our research, which was undertaken as part of an interdisciplinary project with geneticists (Khadari et al. 2008a;
Achtak et al. 2010), shows that cultivated Moroccan fig
varieties are closely related to wild varieties from the western
Mediterranean region, which, together with evidence of the
presence of wild fig tree populations prior to domestication,
suggests that the fig was also domesticated in this region
(Khadari et al. 2005). Based on the identification of 194
genotypes among 277 cultivated fig trees throughout Morocco, Achtak et al. (2010) argue that fig varietal and genetic
diversity in Morocco is mainly the result of selection of
varieties from individuals originating from sexual reproduction and more marginally from somatic mutations over a long
time span. This paper aims at developing our understanding of
present day farmers’ knowledge and practices regarding fig
diversity and selection processes and at gaining a better understanding of the roles of fig intraspecific diversity in a local
Mediterranean society. We worked in the Rif, an area in
northern Morocco that has the highest level of fig diversity
in the country (Ater et al. 2008).1 Northern Morocco, identified in historical sources as a fig cultivation area, is still today
the most important fig cultivation area (Léon L’Africain 1908;
Oukabli 2002). The area is inhabited by three major sociocultural groups, the Jbala, the Ghomara and the Zenete.
The Site and the People
The Rif is a mountain chain forming a concave arc open
towards the Mediterranean Sea. The physical environment is
1
Of the 194 fig genotypes Achtak (2009) identified throughout
Morocco he found 122 in the Rif.
highly heterogeneous. In association with the mountains
facing it in Spain, it forms a hot spot of biodiversity, the
Baetic-Rifan complex (Médail and Quézel 1999). The
inhabitants live in basic territorial units known as Qabila
(Munson 1981). Each Qabila comprises different patronymic
groups of different origin. The Berbers were the major inhabitants of Morocco prior to the arrival of the Arab Muslims in
the seventh century (Camps 1983). Their arrival resulted in
changes in a number of aspects of Berber society, e.g., heritage
systems and the adoption of Arabic language. Spanish influence, resulting first from the expulsion of the Muslims and
Jews from Andalusia at the end of the fifteenth century and
later from the colonial annexation of the Rif by Spain (1912–
1956), also impacted culture and agriculture.
The Rif mountains are divided into three sociogeographical areas (Fig. 1):
&
&
&
The Jbala, who speak dialects of Arabic, inhabit the
Atlantic slope and the north-western part of the Mediterranean border.
The Ghomara, who speak dialects of both Berber and
Arabic, inhabit the central western Mediterranean side.
The Zenete, contemporary Rifian Berbers who speak a
dialect of Berber, inhabit the eastern Mediterranean
mountains.
Methods
A survey was conducted throughout the Rif in 189 villages,
including 116, 50 and 23 villages in the areas occupied by
the Jbala, Ghomara and Zenete respectively (Fig. 1). We
inventoried fig varietal names and recorded their morphological characteristics by direct observation and according to
specific traits mentioned by farmers. In addition to this
preliminary survey, a detailed study of the naming
approaches, classifications and concrete practices applied
to fig trees was conducted in the Jbala area, in the Bni
Ahmed Qabila (Province of Chefchaouen) and more specifically in the village of Talandaoued, which covers 52.2 km²
and has a population of 10365 (RGHP 2004).
The ethnobotanical survey in Talandaoued was based on
direct observations and interviews carried out during 14
visits of 10 days over three years (2006–2008). We identified fig varieties with a sample of 70 men chosen through
snowball sampling (Salganik and Heckathorn 2004): farmers with a reputation for their knowledge of trees were
interviewed individually and in turn identified further
informants. We asked farmers during visits to the field to
make a list of varieties they knew and to note those they
actually planted. We then held open discussions on specific
characteristics of each variety (phenology, morphology, naming system, criteria of differentiation among varieties, uses,
Author's personal copy
Hum Ecol
Fig. 1 Map showing villages visited for fig survey in the Rif, northern Morocco
cultivation practices), which we noted together in the field. In
each case we complemented the data collected during interviews at homesteads with old and young women, who were
more willing to talk indoors than in the fields, men as well as
children. We used ethnobotanical methods based on semistructured and open interviews, and cross-checked information with at least three informants (Martin 1995).
To understand fig ethno-taxonomy, we analyzed semantic
categories or lexemes revealing the meanings of fig names
used by the farmers (both men and women), which we
compared with the meanings in Arabic or Berber. We distinguished motivated lexemes (those having a meaning locally) from non-motivated lexemes (those having no
meaning locally). Motivated categories can be studied
through analyzing (i) their etymology, (ii) the semantic
fields to which they belong and (iii) the social contexts in
which they are used (Colombel and Tersis 2002).
We identified the local system of classification of fig
varieties on the basis of the lexemes used and of the differentiations made between varieties in current discourse
showing either oppositions or analogies between categories
or descriptors. Thus we aimed at identifying categories that
are hierarchically similar for describing fig varieties (e.g.,
parthenocarpic as opposed to non-parthenocarpic). This
method is based on the computational approach which consists in grouping categories together when they relate to a
common level of recognition by people (Wallace and Atkins
1960). All values, uses and practices attached to specific
varieties or all fig varieties were noted. Repeated interviews
with a large number of persons enabled us to cross-check
names given to each morphological type and to group different names together when they referred to the same fig
type (on the basis of fruit morphology), thus revealing cases
of synonymy. A quantitative approach was used to identify
frequencies and abundance of fig varieties cultivated by 10
Bni Ahmed families in order to understand variations at the
household and individual levels in fig diversity.
Results
Naming the Figs
We found 191 lexemes corresponding to 133 morphotypes
or varieties reproduced by vegetative propagation, in 189
villages surveyed. Of the 133 varieties, 39 % had one or
more synonyms, with 16 %, 13 % and 10 % of fig types
having synonyms in Jbala, Ghomara and Zenete respectively. The fact that two different languages, Arabic and Berber,
are used in the Rif explains some but not all synonymies.
Indeed, some people are conscious that the names they
use differ from those given by their immediate neighbors
Author's personal copy
Hum Ecol
speaking the same language, for the same variety. Names
may vary from one locality to another for the same morphotype, with the exception of 30 commercially important varieties, each of which is known throughout the Rif by a
single name (Tables 1 and 2). There are also variations in
names resulting from the berberization of the Arabic name
of the variety or arabisization of Berber names which were
grouped as a single variety names.
Locally, all fig varieties are grouped into an inclusive
semantic category, kermous, which is used only for economic purposes, or once the figs have been dried or are prepared
as food. When listing fig varieties farmers use basic terms
(e.g., messari, lemdar) which define the varieties. The latter
may be differentiated with a determinant which defines a
slight difference in morphology. Our results show that some
terms carry everyday meanings whereas others do not have
any specific meaning. Since neither a Jbala plant lexicon nor
a linguistic atlas of Jbala (Arabic dialect) or Berber (Tariffit
dialect) is available, it is difficult to trace their etymology.
Non-motivated Basic Terms
Out of 133 varieties collected throughout the Rif, 48 % have
a motivated basic term, 52 % are non-motivated with 46 %
of simple terms and 6 % having a basic term plus a determinant (Fig. 2).
Local explanations for non-motivated categories relate to
the way the Jbala perceive their history. Informants repeatedly expressed the following idea: “it is not us, present-day
farmers who have given these names; the fig trees were here
before we [meaning ‘our patrilineage as well as the group of
patrilineages that form the community’] arrived and already
had names,” indicating their perception that over a long
period of time different groups arrived from different places
(cf. Jamous 1981). Although this is not a precise historical
reality, it reflects the way families identify themselves as
Table 1 Distribution of varieties bearing distinct basic
terms among the three
sociocultural groups of the Rif,
northern Morocco. Shaded cells
indicate varieties in each naming
category shared by 3 or 2
groups. Non-shaded cells
indicate varieties distributed in
only one group
forming part of patrilineages originating from different places. Chronologies of their arrival are said to be different,
some recognized as having settled prior to others. In this
context, people claim that the meanings of names of some
fig varieties that were already present have been transformed
or lost over time. Non-motivated basic terms may have motivated determinants. They refer mainly to the color of the fruit
(Table 3). We consider that this secondary level of naming has
occurred to facilitate memorization and transmission. These
determinants may also have been applied to a slightly different
new morphotype (e.g., one arising from somatic mutations or
incorporation of recombinant individuals).
Farmers are aware of variations that occur accidentally in
a fig variety they have known since childhood. However, we
identified only one case where a farmer noticed that a fig
variety, lemkai, was giving fruits with a different color than
expected and immediately took a cutting and planted this
“new” lemkai in another orchard to test whether this characteristic would be maintained. Such experiences are rare
because somatic mutations occur only on a part of a tree
(e.g., on one branch) and the probability that a farmer
actually sees it or is interested in the changes is low. Nevertheless, both the use of motivated determinants and the
precision of knowledge of the diversity of varieties known
by farmers tend to show that selection processes have taken
account of mutational events, and continue to do so.
Motivated Basic Terms
Out of the total of 48 % of basic terms that are motivated,
16 % refer to specific morphological characteristics, 16 % to
a geographic origin or a person, 15 % are analogous to a
domestic object, an animal or people, and 1 % refer to use
characteristics (Fig. 2).
Basic terms referring to morphology or organoleptic
characteristics can be divided into two groups. The first
Naming system
Varieties with distinct basic terms (and determinants)
and morphological types
Jbala
35
Ghomara
18
30
Zenete
21
25
4
Subset of varieties bearing motivated Arabic basic
terms (and determinants)
14
5
13
2
7
0
Subset of varieties bearing motivated Berber (or
arabisized) basic terms
5
4
2
8
2
2
16
Subset of varieties bearing distinct non-motivated
basic terms
9
15
3
16
2
Subset of partially non-motivated terms and varieties
6
Author's personal copy
Hum Ecol
Table 2 Non-motivated basic terms used for fig varieties among the three sociocultural groups, Rif, Northern Morocco
Sociocultural
groups
Jbala
Ghomara
Zenete
Jbala, Ghomara
Ghomara,
Zenete
Jbala,
Ghomara,
Zenete
Abghorto (Amghorto),
Mrighi,
Ferzaoui,
Aaroune, Dar zilane Aachir, Abatssi, Amdjor,
Basic terms, Akroune, Chaari,
Amakouk, Atabant,
Tamrekht Tahadakt,
(Rzilane), El aroui, Amjh, Azoundri, Daachiah,
synonyms
Jaadi, Kharraza,
Bzemiane, El heih,
Tarzint
Erguel (Irgui), Jaghjogha,
Hambri, Hlaoui,
in brakets
Lemki, Lemthel,
Granzi, Kartit, Koutti,
Mlatou, Mzoukane, Markit (Tamarkith),
Ljouhri, Mahesni,
Mazakho, Mezdak (Amezdak), Larchane, Lassoune,
Tamartitah, Ziato
Ouchri, Sendlouj,
Maalmous, Makoutiya,
Sabador, Tabouzraar,
Sersri, Sheili, Silfaf,
Mentouf (Melhtouf),
Tachamlicht (Tachemlalet,
Smouni, Tadeout,
Oonbayze (Mokhbize),
Tachemratech), Tasekrat
Zenfough
Rzilane, Taïhmet
group is based on a ‘direct naming’ process in relation to
visible morphological aspects of the fruit, its organoleptic
characteristics or its capacity to bear a first crop of parthenocarpic spring figs (Table 4). In this group, most varieties
are denoted by basic terms referring to color attributes:
blue, red, green, black and white. Basic terms which refer
to aspects of the leaf (one variety) and organoleptic characteristics (two varieties) are rare. In everyday life, people
often refer to the level of sweetness of a variety. This trait
is currently used to differentiate varieties but rarely appears
in the naming system, because it is not constant. Finally, the
basic term bakor, which refers to the spring parthenocarpic
fig, is used in reference to the capacity of some varieties to
produce a first crop of figs in spring.
The second group of terms is composed of metaphors
establishing an analogy with another object. This group
comprises names which refer to people, plants, animals
Fig. 2 Percentage of distinct
types of fig varieties basic terms
and determinants, Rif, northern
Morocco
including insects and mammals, household objects, musical
instruments and even coins (Table 5). These metaphors
relate to morphological analogy to specific objects (e.g.,
the variety el aawada (flute) is long and narrow) or to
people. Gnaoui is a black variety named after the blackskinned Gnaoua social group living in different parts of
Morocco and in the well-known city of Essaouira. The
metaphors are also built on associations with an activity
(e.g., a food preparation, with the varieties chwenzi (fritter)
and ghoubzi (bread)). Finally a variety may refer to a feeling,
such as massaaour, meaning crazy.
The perceived geographical and sociocultural origin
evoking a place is also used to name figs (Table 6).
People link the names of such varieties to another area
of origin, sometimes giving some elements of oral history. Yet these same varieties, while bearing non-local
names, may paradoxically be considered local. Some
Author's personal copy
Hum Ecol
Table 3 Partially non-motivated
basic terms and determinants of
fig varieties, Rif, northern
Morocco
Basic term
(Synonyms)
Meaning of
basic term
Determinant
Meaning of
determinants
Name of the
variety
Origin among
the three sociocultural groups
(Jbala (J),
Ghomara (G),
Zenete (Z)).
Bakhoukhi
Ajdi
–
–
byed
aberkane
White
Black
Bakhoukhi byed
Ajdi aberkane
Z
Z
Mdar (lemdar,
landbare)
–
hor
hmar
khal
byed
Pure
Red
Black
White
Lemdar hor
Lemdar hmar
Lemdar klhal
Lemdar byed
J, G, Z
Warnaksi (ourenksi)
–
byed
khal
White
Black
Warnaksi byed
Warnaksi khal
J, G, Z
basic terms evoke the name of a person who has a
particular link with this variety (e.g., aïcha), indicating
a significant level of individual relationship to intraspecific diversity.
Seasonality and temporal scales are also used to name
some varieties. For example chetoui (rainy) is a late autumn
variety.
Jbala Classifications of Fig Diversity
Classification relates to naming as well as to other forms of
categorizations that are not explicit in names but are expressed
in discourse and practices (Fig. 3). Within the cultivated areas
many varieties are propagated by cuttings (chjar or kermous),
although trees growing spontaneously from seedlings (nabout)
Table 4 Motivated basic terms and determinants of fig varieties related to morphological, organoleptic or specific biological characteristics, Rif,
northern Morocco
Basic terms and synonyms
Determinant Meaning of
determinants
Names of the varieties
Origin among the
three sociocultural
groups (Jbala,
Ghomara, Zenete)
Zerki (Zreki, Zrirek, Tazegzet)
Blue
Hamri (Hmimer, Hommir, Houmri) Red
Baghi (Dbaghi, Kahoule)
Black
–
–
–
–
–
–
Zerki (Zreki, Zrirek, Tazegzet)
Hamri (Hmimer, Hommir, Houmri)
Baghi (Dbaghi, Kahoule)
J, G
J, G
J, G, Z
El kohli (El kahli, Takherchachet,
Taberkanite, Teberchint)
Ghouddane (Taghouddanit,
Aghouddanit, Aghdiden)
El khodri (El khadri, Azogga)
Bayda (Baydi, Bayoud)
–
el horra
Rough or coarse –
khal
byed
Streaked
–
El kohli (El kahli, Takherchachet,
Taberkanite, Teberchint)
–
Ghouddane (Taghouddanit,
Aghouddanit, Aghdiden)
–
El khodri (El khadri, Azogga)
–
Bayda (Baydi, Bayoud)
Originating from Bayda Rzina
Bni Rzine
Pure
Bayda el horra
–
Harchi (Horrich, Aharchi, Taharchit)
Black
Harchi khal
White
Harchi byed
–
Mechloukh (Mrachek, Acharoti)
Denuded
Honey
–
–
Harchi (Horrich, Aharchi,
Taharchit)
Mechloukh (Mrachek, Acharoti)
Soleikh (Masloukh)
Aassale (Aasslia, Ratli, Tassaad,
Lamti, Marji)
El har (Ahorri)
Bakor (Tabakort, Abakor)
Tazalet
Meaning of
basic terms
–
Green
White
–
–
rzina
–
–
Bitter
–
First crop, Virgin –
or«Which
el horr
comes early »
byed
Fig (in berber)
–
–
–
–
Pure
White
–
Soleikh (Masloukh)
Aassale (Aasslia, Ratli, Tassaad,
Lamti, Marji)
El har (Ahorri)
Bakor (Tabakort, Abakor)
Bakor el horr
Bakor byed
Tazalet
J
J, G, Z
J
J, G, Z
G
G
J, G, Z
J, G, Z
J, G, Z
J
J, G
J, G
J
J, G, Z
J, G, Z
J, G, Z
G
Author's personal copy
Hum Ecol
Table 5 Motivated basic terms and determinants of varieties based on metaphors, Rif, northern Morocco
Basic terms and synonyms
Meaning of basic terms
Determinant
Meaning of
determinants
Name of the varieties
Origin among
Jbala, Ghomara,
Zenete
Chwenzi
Ghoubzi
Fritter
Bread
–
–
–
–
Chwenzi
Ghoubzi
J
J
Gnaoui
Lwizi
Inhabitants of Essaouira (Mogador)
Old gold coin
–
–
–
–
Gnaoui
Lwizi
J
J
Kaytone
El aawada
Tent
Flute
–
–
–
–
Kaytone
El aawada
G
J
Tabli (Tobli)
Drum
–
–
Tabli (Tobli)
J, G
Gouzi (Gaouzi)
Taoumi
Chtabarra
Like an almond
Garlic
Blastophaga (fog pollinating insect)
–
–
–
–
–
–
Gouzi (Gaouzi)
Taoumi
Chtabarra
J, G, Z
Z
G
Onk
Neck
hmam
Dove
Onk Hmam
J, G, Z
Hafer (Ahafer, Ahafath, Hafri)
Lower part of the
–
–
J, G, Z
bghal
Mule
Hafer (Ahafer, Ahafath,
Hafri)
Hafer Bghal
jmel
Dromedary
Hafer Jmel
J, G, Z
Ane
–
–
–
–
–
Gold measure
unit«karat »
–
Jeld Hmar
Masaaour
Kallal
Tahzamt
Maaynek (Bouaanayek)
Rakhsi
J
G
J
Z
J
J
Rkak kerrat
J
El hawla
G
Jeld
Masaaour
Kallal
Tahzamt
Maaynek (Bouaanayek)
Rakhsi
Rkak
Skin
Mad
Pottery
With a beard
With a neck
Not expensive
Thin
hmar
–
–
–
–
–
kerrat
El hawla
Somebody who is equivocal
–
are also found there. Both fig trees growing from seedlings and
from cuttings are differentiated into male (dokkar), which are
actively used by farmers for caprification, (see below) and
female (kermous, meaning fig) types. Here local taxonomy is
congruent with the biological classification of the dioecious
tree into male and female. Males and females may both be
propagated by cuttings and are differentiated into early, intermediate and late categories, although such categories are not
used to name varieties but are only used in discourse. Among
the female varieties, people distinguish those which bear one
crop, the summer-autumn figs, from those which bear two
crops, the parthenocarpic spring fig (bakor, meaning pure or
virgin) and summer-autumn figs. The latter may also be either
parthenocarpic or non-parthenocarpic. Non-partehnocarpic figs
require active transfer of male figs from a male tree to a female
tree in order to facilitate pollination and therefore maturation of
the figs. This practice is known as tedkar (meaning bringing the
dokkar) or caprification: every day over the course of about one
week household members collect male figs which contain
active pollinating wasps (Blastophaga psenes), which have
completed part of their life cycle inside the male figs, and place
them on female trees. The farmers time caprification for each
variety according to the size of fruits and recognition of a
J, G, Z
period during which the variety is receptive, depending on
whether it is an early, intermediate or late one. Only three male
varieties, hlou, an early variety, followed chronologically by
morre and then lwizi, are cultivated. In the male variety hlou
(sweet or soft) the pollinating wasps (Blastophaga psenes) are
affected by a parasite locally known as chenwila. This is the
specific parasite of Ficus carica (Philotrypesis caricae) and is
distinguished locally on the basis of a distinct morphological
trait, a long ovipository organ, in addition to the red hue of its
abdomen, which distinguishes it from the good insect. Farmers’ descriptions are congruent with the morphology of these
two insects (Joseph 1958). Dokkar Hlou is the least valued by
farmers for caprification for this reason even though it is an
early variety required to caprify the early female varieties.
Morre (bitter) locally indicates good quality and strength of
the Blastophaga accompanied by a lower percentage of parasites. Lwizi (a reference to old gold coins) is the latest and
rarest variety, but is more infested by the parasite than the
other two varieties.
The survey in Talandaoued recorded 15 varieties of fig
within the village territory, of which 40 % yield one crop of
summer-autumn figs and 60 % yield spring plus summerautumn figs. Eighty-seven per cent require caprification and
Author's personal copy
Hum Ecol
Table 6 Basic terms of fig varieties referring to characteristics of origin, Rif, northern Morocco
Basic term and synonyms Meaning of basic term
Determinant Meaning of
determinant
Name of the variety
Origin among the
three socio-cultural
groups (Jbala,
Ghomara, Zenete)
Messari (Souffir)
Saaidi
Originating from Bni Messara
Originating from Bni Saaid
–
–
–
–
Messari (Souffir)
Saaidi
J, G
J, G, Z
Ghzaoui (Aazaoui)
Mtioui
Originating from Ghzaoua
Originating from Mtioua
–
–
–
–
Ghzaoui (Aazaoui)
Mtioui
J
J
Lkhomsi
Originating from Lkhoms
–
–
Lkhomsi
J, G
Aznassen
Tafoufrahet (Boufrah)
Originating from Bni Znassen
Originating from Bni Boufrah
–
–
–
–
Aznassen
Tafoufrahet (Boufrah)
Z
G
Arifi
Sebti
Originating from Rif
Originating from Sebta
–
–
–
–
Arifi
Sebti
J
J, G, Z
El fassi (Afassi)
Originating from Fes
–
–
El fassi (Afassi)
J, G, Z
Arinaam
Taberrint
Berret
Aïcha
Originating from the village Arinaayem
Originating from the village Taberrint
–
Related to Aïcha
–
–
Aïcha
–
–
–
name of a girl
–
Arinaam
Taberrint
Berret Aïcha
Aïcha
G
G, Z
G, Z
J
Hajjaje
Issa
Barrani
Nabout
(Aghaddo Imghi)
Related to Hajjaje
Related to Issa
The foreigner
That grows spontaneously
–
O Daoued
–
–
azegza
ihemaren
–
name of a boy
–
–
Green
Red
Hajjaje
Issa o Daoued
Barrani
Nabout (Aghaddo Imghi)
Nabout azegza
Nabout ihemaren
J
Z
J, G
J, G, Z
only two varieties, Ghouddane and Lassoune, are parthenocarpic. Non-parthenocarpic varieties are distinguished locally into
two large groups according to their color when dried (black
varieties, kallal to assale, and white varieties, lemdar to aïcha)
(Fig. 4). White dried figs are largely preferred for trade. They
are perceived as more attractive and their light hue makes it
easier to see whether they have been properly dried. Among
the white and black dried figs, farmers distinguish three categories: (1) bad ones, kbibha, including any variety of small size
and not dried properly, which are intended for sale to distil the
fig alcohol mehia, to prepare a coffee substitute, or to feed
animals; (2) average quality figs, marjouaa, are mainly
intended for sale, but a small amount is kept for family consumption and for gifts and donations; (3) high quality, sbibha
(a diminutive of sabouha, radiant in Arabic) are kept for family
consumption and gifts. Surpluses of the two latter varieties
fetch high prices. Bni Ahmed farmers consider only the black
variety ghouddane and the white variety koutti as sbibha.
also intermediate wholesalers of dried figs, are either permanent merchants (4) or itinerant buyers (6) who buy figs from
each of the weekly souks across the whole Qabila. They either
sell immediately to brokers from larger cities, or further sort
the fig qualities, separating black and white, low, medium and
high quality. The two high quality varieties, ghouddane and
koutti, are made into long strings and sent to merchants in
larger cities (for more details see Supplementary materials).
At the household level, large quantities (difficult to estimate accurately) of fresh spring figs are eaten in the field
and fresh figs are consumed at almost all meals during
summer-autumn fig season. Dried figs are consumed
throughout the year. A few handfuls of figs, olives and bread
constitute the main meal while working in the fields. Dried
figs are also rehydrated and added to soups. An average
family of six or seven consumes 200–300 kg of dry figs per
year and preserves 50 to 70 kg for donations. The consumption of dried figs is the highest during the month of Ramadan (500 gr. to 1 kg/day).2
The Economic, Social and Religious Role of Figs
in Bni Ahmed
2
Figs represent a major input in the economy of Bni Ahmed.
The weekly market (souk Tlata—Tuesday souk) is one of
the seven markets of the Qabila. At souk Tlata, buyers who are
According to Hart (1976), in Central Rif figs are the second staple
after barley. The climate in western Rif (Jbala area) is better for fig
cultivation than in Central Rif. Dried figs represent a major staple food
for the Jbala who produce larger quantities of figs than in the inhabitants of Central Rif.
Author's personal copy
Hum Ecol
Classification of fig varieties
Propagated by cuttings : chjar
Cultivated male fig trees :
dokkar (grafts or cuttings)
Early
Late
Intermediate
Spring and autumn figs
Dokkar
Kermous
Female fig trees : kermous
Intermediate
Early
Growing spontaneously by seedlings : nabout
Late
Autumn figs only
Parthenocarpic
Non-parthenocarpic
Pollination and trade
All varieties including nabout, kermous eaten fresh
locally according to preferences, fig quality, color,
and patrimony at family and individual levels
Relative
quantity of
pollinating
insects
Relative
quantity of
parasites
Morphological
characteristics:
color, shape,
analogy to
natural and
domestic objects
Organoleptic
characteristics:
taste, more or
less sweet
Origin
Some varieties dried
preferentially for
trade
Quality
Specific use:
medicinal
vegetable, spring
figs for gifts
Color: black
and while
Pollination
and trade
All surpluses of
all varieties dried
and sold for
making alcohol or
given to goats and
cattle as fodder
Leaves of all
varieties used as
fodder after
pruning
Fig. 3 Vernacular classification of fig varieties according to biological, agronomic and use characteristics, Rif, northern Morocco
Beyond sale and consumption, interest in different fig
varieties reflects farmers’ patrimony, especially the fact that
great-grandparents transferred these varieties. Vegetative
propagation is an explicit means of perpetuating the specific
traits selected by the forefathers. The control of vegetative
propagation, as well as control of all other techniques, is
held to be an element of patrimony. The fact that some
members of the younger generation are not interested in this
knowledge is the cause of much anxiety locally.
Fig. 4 Dendrogram showing
the classification of varieties
according to their most salient
features by the Bni-Ahmed, Rif,
northern Morocco
Figs are also an important social resource. Figs are at the
centre of gift exchanges (fresh or dried) with family and
friends, especially during religious festivities. Religious
representations link fig gifts to the idea of baraka, a concept
central to Rif social life (Jamous 1981) that, among other
attributes, relates to transmission of good luck through carrying an item bought in an area of pilgrimage inhabited long
ago by a holy person. For example, in the Bni Ahmed area a
two-day meeting takes place each year centered on the
Aïcha
Barrani
Lemki
Koutti
Messari
Lemdar
Assale
Harchi
El aawada
Fassi
Ferzaoui
Hamri
Kalal
Ghouddane
Lassoune
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
Dist. Agrégation
2,0
2,5
Author's personal copy
Hum Ecol
mausoleum of a local holy person, Moulay El Arbi, where
visitors buy dried-fig necklaces and thus carry back home
the good luck linked to his divine grace. Dried figs also
accompany burial rites. Shortly after the night of the 27th
day of Ramadan, the close relatives distribute dried figs and
bread at the door of the cemetery. The villagers believe that
each consumed fig erases the sins made during the life of
their deceased parents.
Intra-village Variations of Fig Varieties
Female and male fig trees are present in the 21 agricultural
plots surveyed and are always planted in poly-varietal associations. The number of distinct plots among the farms varies
from 4 to 14 (Table 7). The number of plots in which each
variety is found defines the frequency of each variety and the
abundance of each variety is the number of individuals per
variety in all the plots of each farm. The varieties differ in both
their frequencies and their abundance on each farm (Fig. 5).
While some are planted by the majority of the farmers (e.g.,
koutti), others are cultivated by only one farmer (fassi,
aawada). Some varieties are abundant (koutti) and others rare
(e.g., barrani). These variations reflect personal tastes and
strategies of individual farmers, in particular relating to the
time required for drying and pollinating, the variety’s precocity and commercial value. Farmers show quite distinct levels
of interest in the varieties (Table 7); They are interested in
keeping those transmitted by their forefathers, although some
may have become rare at the expense of varieties with higher
commercial value. Koutti is the most abundant variety because, in addition to having a double crop and being white,
it is in greatest demand in the dried fig market. A popular
black variety, ghouddane, has a double crop, is very sweet,
has good drying characteristics, medicinal value and is parthenocarpic, but is not as abundant as koutti, possibly because
current market demands favor white varieties.
Table 7 Preferences shown by
10 families among 15 fig varieties, Bni Ahmed, Rif, northern
Morocco
Farmers
Age
Sex
Discussion and Conclusion
We argue here that fig intraspecific diversity is a key element of Rif agroecosystems and plays an important role in
many dimensions of social, economic and religious life. It
structures the agro-sylvo pastoral system of this region, and
is important for household diet and animal fodder, in addition to being an important source of income through trade in
dried figs. Following Garibaldi and Turner (2004), due to its
multiple social, cultural and economic roles we consider
Ficus carica a cultural keystone species. Fig intraspecific
diversity has been maintained to a large extent despite the
negative effects of the expansion of cannabis cultivation on
agrodiversity in the Rif (Hmimsa 2009).
The high level of intraspecific diversity, the complexity
of the naming system of fig varieties and classification
system, associated with high sociocultural and economic
values contrasts with a much lower level of olive diversity
(only seven local varieties, Hmimsa and Ater 2008) in the
same agroecosystems in the Rif. This low level of diversity,
associated with the existence of one clone, the Picholine
marocaine, which is dominant throughout Morocco (Khadari
et al. 2008b), may be related to government agricultural
policies, at least since the French protectorate period (1912–
1956) (Aumeeruddy-Thomas unpublished data), which have
favored olive plantations and olive oil production for export.
Fig cultivation, however, has never been promoted by agricultural policy, probably due to the difficulty of developing
trade in fresh figs, and this could have contributed to the
maintenance of highly localized intraspecific diversity. Similarly the use of many synonyms (different names for a similar
morphotype) may be attributed to the low level of long distance trade. A binary naming system based on color differentiation into black and white dried figs is used for trade,
regardless of the fresh variety names, except for a few varieties
which have a wide reputation.
Preference
Spring fig
Fresh fig
Dry fig
Ghouddane, Harchi,
Messari
Koutti, Lassoune
Koutti
Koutti
1
45
M
Ghouddane, Harchi, Lassoune
Aassale, Harchi, Koutti
2
3
4
30
22
48
F
M
M
Aassale, Ghouddane
Ghouddane, Messari
Messari
5
80
M
Ghouddane, Lassoune
6
7
8
92
36
42
M
M
M
Ghouddane, Harchi, Messari
Ghouddane, Messari
Ghouddane, Messari
Lassoune
Lassoune
Fassi, Ghouddane,
Lassoune, Messari
Aassal, Hamri, Kallal,
Lemdar, Messari
Kallal, Koutti, Messari
Ghouddane, Messari
Aassale, Koutti,
Lassoune, Messari,
Ghouddane, Kouttti
Kallal, Koutti
Ghouddane, Koutti
Ghouddane, Koutti
Author's personal copy
Hum Ecol
Fig. 5 Histogram of
frequencies and abundance
curve of fig varieties recorded
in the Bni Ahmed area, Rif,
northern Morocco
120%
150
Variety frequencies
140
Variety abundance
130
100%
120
110
80%
100
80
60%
70
60
40%
Abundance
Frquence
90
50
40
30
20%
20
10
Aa
wa
da
i
Fa
ss
i
Fe
rz
aw
Le
m
ki
ch
a
Ba
rr a
ni
Ai
Aa
ss
al
Ha
m
ri
G
ho
ud
an
e
La
so
un
e
Ha
rc
hi
La
m
da
r
es
sa
ri
ka
ll a
l
0
M
ko
ut
ti
0%
Variety of fig
The number of synonyms for the same variety reflects the
fact that fig clones from a particular patrilineage tend to be
kept within its territory. Patrimonial management of clonally
propagated plants has been highlighted by other authors in
relation to tubers (Caillon et al. 2006; Emperaire and Peroni
2007; Heckler and Zent 2008). The interest of each social
group in keeping and maintaining its own sets of named
varieties is a sociocultural process that underpins the highly
localized diversification pattern in Morocco described by
Achtak et al. (2010). However this interest in maintaining
inherited varieties does not eliminate innovative processes
(incorporation of varieties originating from mutational events
or from other areas), thus showing farmers’ great interest in
diversity. The tension created between conservation of local
patrimony and farmers’ capacity to incorporate varieties from
elsewhere is at the center of diversification processes.
A large array of color attributes of fresh fruits (5 to 6
different colors) is used to distinguish among fig varieties.
Color attributes form either basic terms to name varieties or
determinants attached to a non-motivated basic term of a
given variety. As discussed in many studies (e.g., Benz et al.
2007; Gibson 2009), color is one of the most prominent
characteristics enabling farmers to distinguish landraces and
facilitate their maintenance and transmission through specific propagation practices.
In addition to color attributes, our survey showed that the
naming system covers a diversity of lexical fields. Motivation facilitates memorization and intergenerational knowledge transmission following three naming procedures: 1)
analogical; 2) metaphor linking to objects, animals, humans,
seasons, numbers, showing intricate linkages between human domestic life and fig names; 3) linkage to perceived
origins. Fig tree varieties named for their places of origin are
also seen as local. We see here a locally constructed analogy
of the incorporation of people to form present territorial
social groups with varieties of fig trees, both originating
from another place as well as having local identity. This
particular importance given to frontiers in shaping identity
as well as environment and landscapes has also been highlighted by Simenel (2010) regarding Berber communities
from southern Morocco. A motivated lexeme is a label with
a precise meaning. Non-motivation, on the contrary, indicates either lexical loss (Hill et al. 2003) or names which
have been borrowed from other places and which do not
have a meaning locally. Movements of people, on one hand,
and of fig tree varieties, on the other, can in part explain
non-motivated categories.
Recombinant individual fig varieties propagated by
cuttings are named nabout, “spontaneous seedling”
(Aumeeruddy-Thomas 2010). This suggests their recent incorporation in the portfolio of varieties reproduced by vegetative propagation, which is generally used for other tree
species, such as olive and chestnut, and an on-going diversification process from selection of seedlings similar to that
described by McKey et al. (2010) for other clonally propagated plants. The complex biology of dioecious Ficus carica and
its co-evolution with a specific pollinating insect (Kjellberg et
al. 1987) also form the base for the complex local classification system, thus adding to overall varietal diversity. The
existence of double-crop varieties, parthenocarpic and nonparthenocarpic varieties, resulting from long-term selection
and domestication processes (Zohary and Hopf 2000) constitutes another level of complexity and opportunity to
maintain variations.
Author's personal copy
Hum Ecol
The reasons why the Jbala communities maintain such high
levels of diversity appear to be: 1) the inherent complexity of
the biology of Ficus carica; 2) patrimonial factors; and 3)
selection and naming of varieties linked to multiple factors
(agronomic, cultural, economic). Intraspecific diversity is the
result of incorporation of varieties rising from somatic mutations occurring on existing varieties, incorporation of new
varieties originating from sexual recombination, cumulating
varieties from heritage and transmission as well as incorporation of varieties from other localities. Although these practices
tend towards an increase of diversity over time, our research
also shows that some old and renowned varieties may become
rare because farmers favor varieties that have higher commercial value. Variations among farmers’ portfolios of varieties
suggest the importance of inter-family preferences and individual preferences in shaping diversity. The analysis of intravillage variations shows that, beyond the discourse about the
importance of varieties transferred by forefathers, farmers
cultivate more intensively high value varieties. Potential loss
of traditional varieties due to modern market demands highlights the importance of developing in situ conservation
approaches which reconcile the economic requirements of
farmers and their desire for innovations with the importance
of maintaining patrimonial varieties.
Acknowledgements We thank the Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle
et Evolutive, CNRS, UMR 5175, Agropolis Fondation, RTRA N°
07042 “FigOlivDiv” and GDRI BIOME (CNRS) for their support.
We also thank the Bni Ahmed people for welcoming our work and
their availability during the study as well as all the inhabitants of the
Rif who have generously taken some time to discuss about their fig
varieties with us. Many thanks also to Pr. Doyle McKey, Dr. Finn
Kjellberg and Dr. Bouchaib Khadari for their thoughtful comments on
an earlier version and to Marco Pautasso and John Vandermeer for their
suggestions for improving the manuscript.
References
Achtak, H. (2009). Domestication et diversification variétale chez le
figuier au Maroc: bases pour la conservation et la valorisation des
ressources génétiques locales, PhD Thesis, Supagro, Montpellier.
Achtak, H., Ater, M., Oukabli, A., Santoni, S., Kjellberg, F., and
Khadari, B. (2010). Traditional Agroecosystems as Conservatories and Incubators of Cultivated Plant Varietal Diversity: The
Case of Fig (Ficus carica L.) in Morocco. BMC Plant Biology 10:
28.
Ater, M., El Oualkadi, A., Achtak, H., Oukabli, A., and Khadari, B.
(2008). Diversity of the Local Varieties of the Fig Tree In The
North-Western Morocco. Acta Horticulturae 798: 69–76.
Aumeeruddy-Thomas, Y. (2010). Des clones aux semis: domestication
des arbres en méditerranée, un continuum entre nature et culture.
Exemples de Ficus carica L., Olea europaea L. et Castanea sativa
Mill. In Delhon, C., Théry Parisot, I., and Thiébault, S. (eds.), Des
Hommes et Des Plantes: Exploitation du Milieu et des Ressources
Végétales De La Préhistoire a Nos Jours. APDCA editions, Antibes, pp. 379–390.
Aumeeruddy-Thomas, Y., Hmimsa, Y., Ater, M., and Khadari, B.
(2012). Beyond the divide between wild and domesticated: spatiality, domesticity and practices pertaining to fig (Ficus carica L.)
and olive (Olea europaea L.) agroecosystems in Morocco. In
Chevalier, A., Marinova, E., and Peña-Chocarro, L. (eds.), Crops
and People: Choices and Diversity Through Time. OXFAM,
London. Earth EU, Brussels.
Bartolini, G., Prevost, G., Messeri, C., Carignani, G., and Menini, U. G.
(1998). Olive Germplasm. Cultivars and World-Wide Collections.
FAO, Rome.
Bellakhdar, J. (2003). Le Maghreb à Travers Ses Plantes. Le Fennec,
Casablanca.
Benz, B., Perales, H., and Brush, S. (2007). Tzeltal and Tzotzil Farmer
Knowledge and Maize Diversity in Chiapas, Mexico. Current
Anthropology 48(2): 289–300.
Blondel, J. (2006). The Design of Mediterranean Landscapes: A Millennial Story of Humans and Ecological Systems During the
Historic Period. Human Ecology 34: 713–729.
Bouby, L., and Ruas, M. P. (2012). Between occasional food
and speculative cultures: diversity of fruit uses, diversity of
practices in fruit trees cultivation. In Chevalier, A., Marinova,
E., and Peña-Chocarro, L. (eds.), Crops and People: Choices
and Diversity Through Time. OXFAM, London. Earth EU,
Brussels.
Brookfield, H. C. (2001). Exploring Agrodiversity. Columbia University Press, New York.
Caillon, S., Quero-García, J., Lescure, J. P., and Lebot, V. (2006).
Nature of Taro (Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott). Genetic Diversity Prevalent in a Pacific Ocean Island, Vanua Lava, Vanuatu.
Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 53(6): 1273–1289.
Camps, G. (1983). Comment la Berbérie est Devenue le Maghreb
Arabe. Revue de l’Occident musulman et de la Méditerranée 35:
7–24.
Colombel, V., and Tersis, N. (2002). Lexique et Motivation. Perspective Ethnolinguistique, Selaf no 400. Peeters, Paris.
Condit, I. J. (1947). The Fig. Waltham, Massachusettes.
Emperaire, L., and Peroni, N. (2007). Traditional Management of
Agrobiodiversity in Brazil: A Case Study of Manioc. Human
Ecology 35: 761–768.
Garibaldi, A., and Turner, N. (2004). Cultural Keystone Species: Implications for Ecological Conservation and Restoration. Ecology and
Society 9(3): 1 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss3/art1.
Gibson, R. W. (2009). A Review of Perceptual Distinctiveness in
Landraces Including Analysis of How its Roles Have Been Overlooked in Plant Breeding for Low-Input Farming Systems. Economic Botany 63(3): 242–255.
Gsell, S. (1914). Histoire ancienne de l'Afrique du Nord: Les conditions du développement historique; les temps primitifs; la colonisation phénicienne et l'Empire de Carthage. Paris.
Hart, D. M. (1976). The Aith Waryaghar of the Moroccan Rif: an
Ethnography and History. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Heckler, S., and Zent, S. (2008). Piaroa Manioc Varietals: Hyperdiversity or Social Currency? Human Ecology 36: 679–697.
Hill, J. H., Sanga, G., and Ortali, G. (2003). What is lost when names
are forgotten? In Nature Knowledge. Ethnoscience, Cognition,
and Utility. Berghahn Books, New York, pp. 163–184.
Hmimsa, Y. (2009). L’agrobiodiversité, de l’agroécosystème à l’arbre:
cas du Rif (Nord du Maroc), Doctoral Dissertation, University
Abdelmalek Essâadi, Tetouan, Maroc.
Hmimsa, Y., and Ater, M. (2008). Agrodiversity in the Traditional
Agrosystems of the Rif mountains (North of Morocco). Biodiversity: Journal of life on earth 9: 78–81.
Jamous, R. (1981). Honneur et Baraka: Les Structures Traditionnelles
dans le Rif. Ed La Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, Paris.
Joseph, K. J. (1958). Recherches sur les chalcidiens Blastophaga psenes
L. du figuier (Ficus carica L.). Ann des Sci. Nat Zool 13: 187–260.
Author's personal copy
Hum Ecol
Khadari, B., Grout, C., Santoni, S., and Kjellberg, F. (2005). Contrasted Genetic Diversity and Differentiation Among Mediterranean Populations of Ficus carica L.: A Study Using mtDNA
RFLP. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 52: 97–102.
Khadari, B., Ater, M., Achtak, H., Oukabli, A., Roger, J. P., and
Kjellberg, F. (2008a). Moroccan Fig Present Specific Genetic
Resources: A High Potential of Local Selection. Proceedings of
the Third International Symposium on Fig (Eds.), Leitao J. et
Neves M.A. Acta Horticukturae 708: 33–38.
Khadari, B., Charafi, J., Moukhli, A., and Ater, M. (2008b). Substantial Genetic Diversity in Cultivated Moroccan Olive Despite a
Single Major Cultivar: A Paradoxical Situation Evidenced by the
Use of SSR Loci. Tree Genetics and Genomes 4: 213–221.
Kislev, M. E., Hartmann, A., and Bar-Yosef, O. (2006). Early Domesticated Fig in the Jordan Valley. Science 312: 1372–1374.
Kjellberg, F., Gouyon, P. H., Ibrahim, M., Raymond, M., and Valdeyron,
G. (1987). The Stability of the Symbiosis Between Dioecious Figs
and Their Pollinator: A Study of Ficus carica L. and Blastophaga
psenes L. Evolution 41: 693–704.
Léon L'Africain (1908). Description de l'Afrique: Tierce Partie du
Monde, Hamy, Ernest-Théodore ed Paris.
Martin, G. J. (1995). Ethnobotany. A People and Plants Conservation
Manual. Chapman and Hall, London.
McKey, D., Elias, M., Pujol, B., and Duputié, B. (2010). The Evolutionary Ecology of Clonally Propagated Domesticated Plants.
New Phytologist 186: 318–332.
Médail, F., and Quézel, P. (1999). Biodiversity Hotspots in the Mediterranean Basin: Setting Global Conservation Priorities. Conservation Biology 13(6): 1510–1513.
Munson Jr., H. (1981). The Mountain People of North Western Morocco:
Tribesman or Peasant? Middle Eastern Studies 17(2): 249–255.
Oukabli, A. (2002). Diversité génétique et choix des génotypes performants pour la culture du figuier Ficus carica L. au Maroc. In Actes de
la journée, Figuier, Potentialités et perspectives de développement
de la figue sèche au Maroc., Meknès (Maroc) pp. 10–21.
Perfecto, I., and Vandermeer, J. (2010). The Agroecological Matrix as
Alternative to the Land-sparing/Agriculture Intensification Model. PNAS 107(13): 5786–5791.
RGHP (2004). Recensement Général de l’Habitat et de la Population
au Maroc. Al Ed. Al Maarif Al Jadida, Rabat.
Salganik, M. J., and Heckathorn, D. D. (2004). Sampling and Estimation in Hidden Populations Using Respondent-Driven Sampling.
Sociological Methodology 34(1): 193–239.
Simenel, R. (2010). L’origine est aux frontières. Les Aït Ba’amrane, un
exil en terre d’Arganiers (Sud Maroc). CNRS Editions. Edition de
la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, Paris.
Wallace, A. F. C., and Atkins, J. (1960). The Meanings of Kinship
Terms, American Anthropologist. New Series 62(1): 58–80.
Zohary, D., and Hopf, M. (2000). Domestication of Plant in the Old
World, 3rd ed. Clarendon, Oxford.
Zohary, D., and Spiegel-Roy, P. (1975). Beginnings of Fruit Growing
in the Old World. Science 187: 319–327.