Introduction

In a world characterized by a continuously expanding global population, the challenge of ensuring food security has become increasingly pressing (FAO 2017). While modern agriculture predominantly relies on a limited selection of cultivated crops, a vast and underutilized resource exists in the form of wild edible plants. Despite the incredible diversity of plant life on Earth, only a fraction of it has been incorporated into our agricultural systems, with approximately 3.000 species cultivated on a large scale (Gepts 2004). However, wild edible plants, often brimming with essential nutrients and displaying resilience in the face of environmental challenges, hold tremendous potential in supplementing our diets, particularly during periods of food scarcity (Pieroni et al. 2005). Ethnobotanical research has emerged as a critical tool in preserving the traditional knowledge and cultural significance associated with these plants, thereby preventing the erosion of invaluable information (Tardío et al. 2002).

The rich ethnobotanical diversity of wild edible plants is a global phenomenon, with each region offering its own unique insights into the utilization of these resources (Turner 1975). In the Mediterranean region, for example, the time-honored tradition of utilizing wild edible plants is deeply entrenched in the local culture, yet this precious knowledge is at risk of fading into obscurity (Pieroni 1999). In India, a country marked by diverse climatic and ecological conditions that provide fertile ground for biodiversity, indigenous communities have relied on wild edible plants for sustenance and medicinal purposes for generations (Kala 2007). In China, efforts to protect and pass on traditional knowledge related to biological diversity and wild edible plants have been prioritized (CBD 2005). Even in Spain, a nation with a varied climate and geography, the practice of using wild plants as a food source endures (Dufour and Wilson 1994). Turkey’s diverse geography and climate have long provided a rich tapestry of edible wild plants that have been essential to Turkish cuisine. Coastal regions boast aromatic herbs like oregano, thyme, and rosemary, while the Anatolian plateau yields staple foods such as lentils, chickpeas, and wheat.

In Turkey, foraging for wild greens, locally referred to as “ot,” is a cherished and widespread tradition. These edible plants play a dual role: not only do they enrich the flavors of Turkish cuisine, but they also symbolize the profound and inseparable bond between the land and the culture. This practice involves the gathering of a diverse array of plants, including but not limited to nettles, purslane, and wild garlic, which subsequently find their way onto dinner tables across the country. This connection between nature and culinary heritage has made Turkey a haven for food enthusiasts and individuals intrigued by the rich gastronomic traditions of the region.

The importance of wild food plants for food security and plant genetic resources is a multifaceted topic that warrants comprehensive exploration. Wild food plants, often overlooked, are integral to human sustenance and agricultural diversity. Understanding their significance involves recognizing their role in providing alternative food sources, especially in times of agricultural challenges. Moreover, these plants contribute to the broader genetic diversity of crops, offering resilience against pests, diseases, and environmental changes. There exists a requisite for scholarly investigations directed towards elucidating the intrinsic nexus between wild food plants, the assurance of food security, and the conservation of genetic resources essential for the enduring sustainability of agricultural ecosystems. Within the realm of ethnobotanical research, numerous investigations have extensively examined the diverse array of wild food plants across various regions in Turkey, leaving behind a valuable repository of knowledge. The exploration of ethnobotanical aspects related to edible wild plants in different regions provides a profound insight into their cultural importance and their potential in addressing the ever-growing global demand for food. However, it is within the province of Sivas that we find a particularly promising source of comprehensive insights into its rich assortment of edible plant species. This research contributes to the dissemination of locally edible policies that are being promoted for local nutrition, playing a significant role in preserving the cultural heritage of Sivas province. Therefore, it offers a current and comprehensive overview of the use and knowledge of wild edible plants in the region, updating and preventing ethnobotanical information.

Materials and methods

Study area

This study had a broad geographical scope, encompassing all the districts within Sivas’s province. These districts include Akıncılar, Divriği, Doğanşar, Gemerek, Gürün, Hafik, İmranlı, Kangal, Koyulhisar, Suşehri, Şarkışla, Ulaş, Yıldızeli, and Zara, as depicted in Fig. 1. The region’s topography varies from high plateaus to mountainous terrains, positioning it as one of Turkey’s prominent plateau-rich provinces, and it has a well-established tradition of consuming wild edible plants. Sivas’s province, situated in the central part of Turkey, offers a diverse topographical and climatic landscape. Sivas is surrounded by mountain ranges, including the Aladağlar and the Eastern Taurus Mountains, contributing to its distinctive and picturesque landscape. The province’s altitude and geographic location lead to a range of climate patterns. The annual temperature fluctuations are considerable, with temperatures plummeting to as low as − 40 °C during winter and rising to approximately 30 °C during the summer months. Sivas experiences a continental climate characterized by cold winters with substantial snowfall and warm summers.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Geographical location of the study area

Full size image

Site selection and survey

Conscious village selection was carried out in each district for a comprehensive biodiversity inventory based on altitude and vegetation cover. The process of selecting these villages received valuable assistance from Development Agents and agricultural specialists working in the study areas. Once these villages were identified, an extensive inventory of wild edible plant species was initiated in each of them. The methodology entailed visiting a total of five different villages within each district, amounting to a comprehensive coverage of 140 villages or small towns across the 14 districts under examination. The data collection phase spanned from 2018 to 2019, encompassing the period from April to October. During this timeframe, intensive fieldwork was conducted to compile detailed inventories of the wild edible plants present in the region. Furthermore, ethnobotanical interviews were conducted with local elders. These interviews were designed to foster open and in-depth discussions, adhering to the recommendations outlined by Martin in 2018. These dialogues were instrumental in uncovering the rich ethnobotanical knowledge within the local community. Preference was given to older and experienced individuals, especially women, as they typically possessed more comprehensive knowledge about edible wild plants compared to men. Each village involved ten informants in the interviews, accumulating to a total of 763 informants (563 female, 200 male) with an average age of 63. The informants were requested to provide comprehensive lists of wild food plants in the region and to detail their knowledge regarding the consumption and gathering of each wild edible plant species. This included information on past and present usage, processing techniques, modes of consumption, Turkish vernacular names, the plant part utilized, traditional preparation methods, and consumption timings. Wild food plant uses were categorized into seven categories, including vegetables (with subcategories like cooked, raw, and pickles), spices, beverages, seeds, fruits, exudates, and subterranean parts (Supplementary material 1).

Plant identification

The identification of reported wild edible plants was carried out following the methods outlined in Davis et al. (1988) and Davis (1965–1985). Prof. Dr. Ali Kandemir conducted the identifications, and two specimens of each wild edible plant species, along with detailed information on the collection locality, plant characteristics, vernacular names, native culinary uses, and cultural significance, were deposited in the herbarium of the Turkey Seed Gene Bank in Ankara and the Erzincan Horticultural Research Institute.

Data analysis

The Cultural Importance (CI) index was employed to evaluate the significance of the studied species according to Tardio and Pardo-De-Santayana (2008). The CI index for a species (UVs) was calculated as the sum of informants mentioning its use-category divided by the total number of informants interviewed in the survey (763). Additionally, the total CI of each use-category was determined by adding the CI values of all the species within that category, and the average CI of the category was calculated by dividing the total CI by the number of species reported in that category. For example, consider the case of Vicia cracca L.. where 111 informants mentioned its use as a cooked vegetable, 90 as a raw vegetable, and 330 as seed. Therefore, CI = (111 + 90 + 330) / 763 = 0.70. As another example, in the use-category “seeds” which includes species like Echinops orientalis Trautv., Gundelia tournefortii L., Cephalaria procera Fish.&Ave-Lall., Vicia cracca and Vicia narbonensis L., 552, 105, 720, 330 and 275 people mentioned these uses, respectively. Their CI values as seeds were 0.72, 0.14, 0.94, 0.43, and 0.36. The total CI of the “seeds” category was 2.60 (0.72 + 0.14 + 0.94 + 0.43 + 0.36), and the average CI was 0.52 (0.26 divided by five, the number of species in the “seeds” category).

Results

The provided plant species were categorized into 29 different families. The collective diversity of plant species within these families amounted to 128 species or sub-plants. Among these, the Asteraceae family stood out as the most diverse, encompassing a total of 22 species. Other notable families included Lamiaceae with 21 species, Apiaceae with 11 species, Polygonaceae with 10 species, Fabaceae with 9 species, and Brassicaceae with 8 species. Some families, such as Acanthaceae, Asparagaceae, Berberidaceae, Campanulaceae, Caprifoliaceae, Capparaceae, Convolvulaceae, Malvaceae, Orobanchaceae, Portulacaceae, Ranunculaceae and Xanthorrhoeaceae were represented by a single species each. Each of these families contained a variety of plant species or subplants, contributing to the rich diversity of botanical life within these families (Fig. 2). Additionally, it was observed that 4 of the 128 species (Scorzonera tomentosa L., Hypericum thymopsis Boiss., Salvia hypargeia Fisch.& C.A. Mey. and Sideritis armeniaca Bornm.) included in the study were native to Turkey. Five species (Acanthus hirsutus Boiss., Agrostemma githago L., Asyneuma virgatum (Labill.) Bornm., Sisymbrium loeselii L., Zosima absinthifolia (Vent.) Lınk,) have been newly documented as additions to the flora of Sivas. Images of field research, descriptions of the species by local people, usage methods and some of the collected species are given in Figs. 3 and 4.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Distribution of plant species according to families

Full size image
Fig. 3
figure 3

Field research and usage methods

Full size image
Fig. 4
figure 4

Some of the collected species (1: Agrostemma githago 2: Anchusa leptophylla 3: Asperugo procumbens 4: Berberis vulgaris 5: Capsella bursa-pastoris 6: Chenopodium album subsp. album 7: Chenopodium foliosum 8: Convolvulus arvensis 9: Erodium cicutarium 10: Falcaria vulgaris 11: Gundelia tournefortii 12: Heracleum pastinacifolium 13: Lactuca serriola 14: Lamium amplexicaule 15: Lathyrus tuberosus 16: Malva neglecta 17: Mentha longifolia 18: Onopordum acanthium 19: Plantago major 20: Polygonum cognatum 21: Rumex crispus 22: Rumex scutatus 23: Salvia aethiopis 24: Salvia verticillata subsp. verticillata 25: Scorzonera cana var. jacquiniana 26: Silene vulgaris var. vulgaris 27: Sinapis alba 28: Sinapis arvensis 29: Stellaria holostea 30: Tragopogon buphthalmoides var. latifolius 31: Urtica dioica 32: Veronica biloba)

Full size image

Classify plants according to edible parts

The plants listed were classified into several categories based on their edible parts. Many of these plants were valued for their leaves and young shoots, which were suitable for consumption. Some plants provided edible onions and leaves, such as Allium vineale L. and Allium atroviolaceum Boiss. A few plants, including S. tomentosa, Scorzonera latifolia (Fısch. & C. A. Mey.) DC., and G. tournefortii, produced edible gum, which had both culinary and medicinal uses. These plants were valued for their flavorful onions and nutritious leaves. Some plants, like Geranium tuberosum L. Cirsium rhizocephalum C.A Mey., Scorzonera suberosa subsp. suberosa K.Koch, and Lathyrus tuberosus L., had edible roots and root collars, which were used in various dishes, contributing to the diversity of the local cuisine. Conversely, another group of edible plants included Beta trigyna Walds. & Kit., Chenopodium foliosum (Moench) Asch., Amaranthus retroflexus L., Atriplex nitens Schkuhr, Chenopodium album subsp. Album L., and various others. These greens played a significant role in various dishes and served as a valuable source of nutrition. Among them Erodium orientale, Convolvulus procera, and Vicia cracca in addition to leaves and shoots, some plants featured edible seeds. These seeds could be consumed directly or used as ingredients in a variety of dishes. Specific plants like Geranium tuberosum, Lathyrus tuberosus, and Crocus biflorus subsp. tauri (Maw) B. Mathew offered edible tubers or subterranean parts, further enhancing the range of available edible plant resources. One unique contribution to the edible plant resources in the region was made by Erodium cicutarium (L.) L’ Her., known for its edible branches and leaves. Berberis vulgaris L. and Chenopodium foliosum were highly regarded for their edible fruits, which not only added to the nutritional diversity but also contributed to culinary variety. Several plants were also known for their edible flowers, such as Consolida orientalis (J. Gay.) Schrödinger and Papaver argemone L. These flowers were prized for their distinctive flavors and found their way into various culinary preparations. Erodium orientale provided edible seed heads. The edible parts of these plants encompassed a wide range of components, including leaves, onions, seeds, flowers, roots, tubers, subterranean parts, gum, fruits, branches, leaves, and receptacula, highlighting the rich culinary and medicinal heritage of the region. This diversity reflected the rich culinary and medicinal heritage of the region, showcasing the versatility of local plant resources (Table 1).

Table 1 Selected attribute of the surveyed wild edible plants used in the Sivas province (Upper Kızılırmak Part of Anatolia, Türkiye)
Full size table

Classify plants according to preparation

The plants listed were classified according to their preparation into several categories. The first category, “Plants Used in Dishes (Category 1),” revealed a plethora of botanical resources that enriched the flavors of dishes. Beta trigyna, bearing names such as Kızılca, Unlucaıspanağı, and Silmastik, was a staple ingredient. A. nitens, known by various names like Telotu, Has Telotu, Beypancar, Şakşak, Sılmık, and Tak, also contributed its unique taste to various preparations. The culinary world benefited from the inclusion of A. retroflexus, referred to as Hoşveren, Karatelce, Bostangüzeli, Kızılcık, and Darıca, as well as C. album subsp. album L., locally recognized as Telotu, Unluca, Telce, Telceli, Tahtacık, and Küllüpancar. C. foliosum, known as Yemiş, Pancar, and Kuşüzümü, added its distinct flavors, and C. rhizocephalum known as Mecikkulağı, enriched the culinary heritage. Onopordum acanthium L., with its various monikers such as Kangal, gelenk, Devedikeni, and Kangaldikeni, became a source of unique tastes, and Centaurea sp. was another valued component. G. tournefortii, known as Kenger and Işgın, offered a touch of the wild to dishes, while Taraxacum sp., referred to as Kedi Tırnağı, contributed its own special flavor. Carduus nutans L., recognized as Eşek Dikeni and At kengeri, also played a noteworthy role in dish preparations. Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop., going by names like Dikence, Kregü, and Köygöçüren, found its place in the culinary landscape. Cichorium intybus L., known as Göğhanık, Cıncık, Kanagug, and Çıtlak, brought a pleasant bitterness to the table. Lactuca serriola L., with its local names Keklikotu and Yağlıca, added a touch of bitterness to dishes. Arctium tomentosum Mill., commonly known as Kabalak, offered a unique flavor that enhanced culinary experiences. Rumex obtusifolius subsp. subalpinus (Schur) Celak. locally referred to as Yaprak and Çayıryaprağı, also played a role in traditional dishes. Polygonum aviculare L., bearing names like Madımak and Atmadımağı, brought its distinct taste, and Polygonum cognatum Meissn., known as Kuşekmeği, Nanacüce, Kırmızı Madımak, Hasmadımak Mercimalak, and Madımalak, added to the culinary diversity (Table 1 and Supplementary material 2).

In the realm of traditional nutrition and culinary practices, the past showcased a diverse range of plants that were consumed raw or used in salads, categorized as "Plants Consumed Raw or in Salads (Category 2).” Among these, Rumex crispus L., known locally as Evelik and Tirşo Tirşoaga, held a significant place on people’s plates. Additionally, the selection included Rumex conglomeratus Murray, which bore names like Kızılkök, Kızılpancar, Dağıspanağı, and Tekirpancarı, and Rumex scutatus L., locally referred to as Oğlakkulağı and Ekşikulak. Furthermore, Rumex tuberosus subsp. horizontalis (K.Koch) Rech.f., with its aliases Tirşo, Kuzukulağı, and Ekşice, and Portulaca oleracea, commonly known as Pirpirim, offered a rich tapestry of flavors for those indulging in salads. Urtica urens L., fondly called Isırgan, also made its mark in these culinary traditions. In the realm of spices, the "Plants Used as Spices (Category 3)" unveiled a rich tapestry of flavors. Scandix iberica M. Bieb., referred to as Çemenpancarı, added its unique aromatic profile to various dishes. Chaerophyllum bulbosum L., with its local name Baldırgan Nazeyışgını, contributed its distinctive taste, while Carum carvi L., known as Çemen and Anason, added its aromatic essence to spice blends. Anthriscus nemorosa (M. Bieb) Spreng., locally referred to as Baldırgan and Nazeyışgın, enriched the culinary experience. Heracleum pastinacifolium K. Koch., with the local name yaryaprağı, offered its unique flavors. Z. absinthifolia, commonly known as Peynirotu, contributed its aromatic and taste qualities to various dishes. Echinophora tenuifolia subsp. sibthorpiana (Guss.) Tutin, referred to as Çördük, added its unique essence to spice blends. Ferula orientalis L., known as Çaşur, became a valuable source of flavor. Eryngium billardiere F. Delaroche, bearing names like Boğa dikeni, Yılandikeni, Kenger, and Şekerdikeni, found its place in various spice combinations. Eryngium campestre L., known as Boğa dikeni, Yılandikeni, Kenger, and Şekerdikeni, contributed to the aromatic diversity of traditional dishes. Falcaria vulgaris Bernh., recognized as Gazayağı, offered its unique taste to spice blends. Arum rupicola Boss., with its local names Kara Nivik Gavurpancarı, Livinç, and Liğiç, enriched the culinary landscape with its distinctive flavors. Eminium rauwolffii var. rauwolffii (Blume) Schott played a part in creating complex and flavorful spice combinations. S. tomentosa, known as Sakız otu, yapalak, and Çıtlıksakızı, became a valued spice component. Scorzonera mollis subsp. mollis M. Bieb. and S. suberosa subsp. suberosa were also important additions to spice blends, known as Yabani sakız, Yapalak, yapsalak, and Çıtlıksakızı, respectively. E. orientalis, bearing the local name “top, topbid”, contributed its unique aromatic qualities. S. armeniaca, known for its use in tea, brought a rich flavor to beverages. Teucrium polium L., with the local name Keklik Otu, found its place in the world of spices. Teucrium chamaedrys L., commonly known as Nane, became an essential element in spice blends. Satureja hortensis L., known as Annuk, added its unique taste to culinary creations. Nepeta italic L., recognized as Nane, enriched the spectrum of flavors. Nepeta racemosa Lam., known as Kedinanaesi, contributed to the aromatic diversity of spices. Thymus sipyleus Boiss., with its local names Kekik and Anuk, brought a rich and earthy flavor to dishes. Thymus fallax Fisch. & C.A. Mey. known as Kekik, Keklikotu, and Nane (Table 1).

Common names with different species

A considerable number of plant species names have been found. It was determined that out of 227 names of wild edible plants in local use, 189 were simple (e.g. arpacık, hosveren) and 38 were complex names (e.g. Istanbul pancarı, dollik kömeç). (Table 1). When the names of all Species were listed, the average number of names was calculated as 2.38. Additionally, species had one, two, three, four, five, or six names (48, 29, 24, 16, 5, and 6, species respectively). There were several plants in the list that shared common names with different species. One of the common names that recurred in different species was “Nane”, “Yağlıca” and “Kekik” belonging to the Lamiaceae family and "Yemlik" belonging to Asteraceae family. N. italica, T. fallax, Thymus leucotrichus Hal., Mentha longifolia L., Ziziphora clinopodioides Lam. and T. chamaedrys were all referred to as “Nane” in Turkish. These plants were known for their flowers and had a variety of culinary uses, especially as spices. Also, the common name “Yağlıca”, was used for Salvia verticillata subsp. verticillata L., Salvia multicaulis Vahl. Salvia virgata Jacq. and Salvia syriaca L. in the Lamiaceae family. They are consumed stuffed with leaves, raw and in the form of tea. Another common name that repeated was “Kekik” in the Lamiaceae family T. sipyleus, T. fallax, T. leucotrichus and Z. clinopodioides were all referred to as “Kekik” in Turkish. They were aromatic herbs, and their young leaves and shoots were used for flavoring dishes, as spices, or for making teas. Lastly another common name found across different species was “Yemlik” in the Asteraceae family. Tragopogon coloratus C.A.Mey, Tragopogon porrifolius subsp. Longirostris (Sch. Bip.) Greuter, Tragopogon buphthalmoides var. latifolius Boiss. and Tragopogon dubius Scop. all shared this name. These plants were valued for their young leaves and shoots which were used raw and in dishes.

Cultural importance (CI) with different species

The study examined various plant use-categories and their respective subcategories, evaluating both the number of species within each category and their Cultural Importance (CI) values. In the “Vegetables" use-category, 128 plant species were identified, with a combined CI value of 80.87, averaging 0.68 CI per species. Among the subcategories within “Vegetables,” “Cooked” (VEGc) had the highest representation, comprising 85 species, with a substantial CI total of 51.00 and an average CI of 0.60 per species. “Raw” (VEGr) vegetables included 61 species, with a CI total of 26.66 and an average CI of 0.44. “Pickles” (VEGp) featured six species, collectively yielding a CI total of 3.20 and an average CI of 0.53. The “Beverage” use-category encompassed 18 species, with a CI total of 11.48 and an average CI of 0.64. The “Exudates” (EXU) category had three species, collectively contributing to a CI total of 2.27, reflecting a high average CI of 0.76 per species. “Seeds” (SEE) contained five species with a CI total of 2.60 and an average CI of 0.52. Conversely, the “Spices” use-category comprised 16 species, contributing to a notable CI total of 12.40, with an impressive average CI of 0.77 per species. In the “Fruits” use-category, only two species were identified, resulting in a CI total of 0.69 and an average CI of 0.35, as presented in Table 2. Within the “Subterranean parts” (SUB) category, seven species were identified, resulting in a CI total of 4.17 and an average CI of 0.60. In the first group, which had a CI value of 1.00, a variety of plants were discovered, including Anchusa leptophylla Roem. & Schult., Fumaria vulgaris, Papaver rhoeas L., Papaver dubium L., Rheum ribes L., Rumex crispus, Rumex scutatus, Rumex tuberosus subsp. horizontalis, Cerinthe minor L., Silene vulgaris var. vulgaris (Moench) Garcke, Convolvulus arvensis L., Geranium tuberosum, Salvia aethiopis L., and Phlomis cognatum. Moving on to the second group with a CI of 0.98, it included Hypericum perfoliatum L. and Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Medik. In the third group with a CI value of 0.96, we found Sonchus asper (L.) Hill. and S. latifolia. Group four, with a CI of 0.95, comprised two plants, Carduus pycnocephalus L. and Portulaca oleracea L. In the fifth group with a CI of 0.94, there were Asparagus officinalis L., A. tomentosum, R. conglomeratus and O. acanthium. The sixth group, with a CI value of 0.90, included S. tomentosa, Echium vulgare L., E. cicutarium and Plantago major L. Group seven, also with a CI of 0.89, contained A. retroflexus, H. pastinacifolium, E. rauwolffii var. rauwolffii, Echium italicum L., H. thymopsis and Eremurus spectabilis M. Bieb. In group eight, with a CI of 0.88, Chenopodium album subsp. album and Stellaria media (L.) Vill. were found. Moving on to group nine with a CI of 0.87, it consisted of C. arvense, Securigera orientalis subsp. orientalis (Mill.) Lassen and P. aviculare. Group ten had an equivalent CI value of 0.85 and was represented by Beta trigyna and Lamium amplexicaule L. In the eleventh group, which had a CI value of 0.84, Veronica biloba L. was present. Finally, in the twelfth group with a CI of 0.83, A. rupicola and C. intybus were found (Table 1).

Table 2 Number of wild edible plant species and cultural importance of the use-categories and subcategories in the Sivas province, Turkey. (BEV, Beverage; EXU, Exudates; PIC, Pickles; SEE, Seeds; SPI, Spices; SUB, Subterranean parts; VEGc, Cooked; VEGp, Pickles; VEGr, Raw)
Full size table

Discussion

In addressing the call for a more comprehensive discussion on the transmission and circulation of knowledge, as well as the integration of Working Group Plans (WGPs) with plant genetic resources strategies, it is imperative to delve into the practical aspects of implementing these ideas. Effective knowledge dissemination can be achieved through targeted educational programs, collaborative initiatives, and accessible platforms that facilitate the exchange of information among stakeholders. Furthermore, exploring the synergy between Wild Genetic Resources (WGP) and broader strategies for plant genetic resources involves identifying key intersections where conservation efforts align with sustainable utilization. Highlighting the potential pathways for knowledge transfer, such as community engagement, scientific publications, and digital resources, would contribute to a more detailed understanding of the mechanisms involved. Additionally, emphasizing the role of WGPs in supporting overarching strategies can enhance the coherence of conservation practices and utilization frameworks. By elucidating these connections in the results section, this study provides valuable insights into not only the theoretical aspects of knowledge dissemination but also the practical implications of integrating WGPs into broader plant genetic resources strategies. In addition, the results of the study present a comprehensive view of the botanical diversity and cultural importance of various plant species within a Sivas region. Based on categorization of plants according to edible parts, the study categorizes plants based on the parts that are edible, revealing a diverse array of edible components. These encompass leaves, onions, seeds, flowers, roots, tubers, subterranean parts, gum, fruits, branches, and receptacula. The richness of these categories reflects the versatility of local plant resources and their pivotal role in the region’s culinary and medicinal heritage. The data reveals that young shoots and leaves play a prominent role as edible parts, making a significant contribution to the local diet. These plant components are versatile, frequently appearing in various dishes, and acting as a significant source of nourishment. Significant species within this category include Brassica minor, Beta trigyna, Berberis vulgaris, Stachys lavandulifolia Vahl, and Amaranthus retroflexus. Certain plants, such as Geranium tuberosum, Cirsium rhizocephalum, Onopordum acanthium, and Rubia conglomerata, feature edible roots and root collars, enriching the diversity of the local cuisine. In addition to leaves and young shoots, some plants offer edible seeds, including Vicia cracca, Erodium orientale, Pisum sativum subsp. elatius (M.Bieb.) Aschers. & Graebn., Cerinthe procera, and Vicia narbonensis. These seeds may be consumed directly or creatively integrated into various dishes, enhancing the culinary experience. Our results also highlight plants known for their edible flowers, like Consolida orientalis and Papaver argemone, valued for their unique flavors and culinary versatility. Some plants, including Lathyrus tuberosus, Crocus biflorus subsp. tauri and Geranium tuberosum, offer edible tubers or subterranean parts, adding to the array of available edible plant resources. Erodium cicutarium (L.) L’Her. is distinctive for its edible seed heads, expanding the culinary options available. The diversity extends to plants that produce edible gum, namely Scorzonera latifolia, Scorzonera tomentosa, and Gundelia tournefortii. The unique characteristics of the plant resources of the region are exemplified by Echinops orientalis Trautv, renowned for its edible leaves and branches, further enriching the diversity of edible plant resources in the area. This gum serves both medicinal and culinary purposes, emphasizing the multifaceted nature of plant resources in the region. Based on our study, the edible parts of these plants encompass a wide range of components, including seeds, leaves, roots, flowers, tubers, gum, subterranean parts, branches, fruits, and more. This diversity reflects the rich medicinal and culinary heritage of the region, showcasing the versatility of local plant resources. The categorization of plants according to their edible parts highlights the remarkable diversity of plant resources in the region. Our results are in line with existing ethnobotanical research, which often reveals the multifaceted uses of plants in local diets and traditional medicine (Şenkardeş and Tuzlacı 2016; Pardo-de-Santayana et al. 2007; Ogle et al. 2003; Kızılarslan and Özhatay 2012; Kadıoglu et al. 2020; Sağıroğlu et al. 2013; Şenkardeş et al. 2022; Yeşil et al. 2019; Demir 2020).

Based on categorization of plants according to preparation, the study goes on to classify plants according to their preparation into several categories, each revealing the distinct role of these plants in culinary practices and shaping the flavors of the region. In the category “Plants Used in Dishes (Category 1),’ a plethora of botanical resources enrich the flavors of local dishes. Notable species like B. trigyna, A. nitens, and A. retroflexus play a significant role in the region’s culinary traditions. The use of plants like C. album subsp. album and C. rhizocephalum adds depth and variety to local dishes. In the realm of traditional nutrition and culinary practices, the study identifies a group of plants consumed raw or in salads (Category 2). R. crispus, R. tuberosus subsp. horizontalis and R. scutatus are particularly significant in this context. These plants are often included in salads, highlighting their role in providing distinct flavors to raw preparations. The “Plants Used as Spices (Category 3)” category unveils a rich tapestry of flavors. Species like S. iberica, T. leucotrichus, S. hortensis, N. italica and C. carvi contribute their unique aromatic profiles to various dishes. The local community benefits from the inclusion of A. nemorosa, H. pastinacifolium, and E. tenuifolia subsp. sibthorpiana, which enhance the culinary experience with their distinctive tastes. The presence of plants used as spices underscores the cultural significance of these botanical resources in shaping local flavors and culinary practices. The findings are consistent with ethnobotanical research that often highlights the importance of spices in regional cuisine, adding depth and complexity to dishes (Block 1991; Doğan et al. 2004; Etkin 2008; Çelik 2023). On the other hand, considering common names shared by different species, the study acknowledges the existence of common names shared by different plant species. This is a common phenomenon in ethnobotanical research and can have implications for accurate plant identification and safety. Indeed, the common name "Nane" and "Yağlıca" is used for various Lamiaceae species, including N. italica, T. fallax, T. leucotrichus, M. longifolia, Z. clinopodioides and T. chamaedrys were all referred to as “Nane” and S. verticillata subsp. verticillata, S. multicaulis, S. virgata Jacq. and S. syriaca knowed as “Yağlıca”. The name “Kekik” is common for T. sipyleus, T. fallax, T. leucotrichus and Z. clinopodioides also in Lamiaceae. This shared common name emphasizes the importance of precise botanical identification to avoid potential safety issues and culinary misapplications.

Although it has been reported that Veronica biloba is used mostly for medicinal purposes, in our study it was stated that food was cooked from its leaves and shoots. Contrary to some research reporting that Rumex crispus seeds were consumed as medicine and tea, this study found that milk soup was made from it (Vasas et al. 2015; Hassan and Ullah 2019; Ahmad and Dastagir 2023; Anwar et al. 2023). Similarly, the common name “Yemlik” is associated with different Asteraceae species, including Tragopogon coloratus C.A.Mey, Tragopogon porrifolius subsp. longirostris (Sch. Bip.) Greuter, T. buphthalmoides var. latifolius and T. dubius. These plants are valued for their young leaves, shoots, and seeds, which are used in dishes and teas. The presence of shared common names underlines the need for clear botanical nomenclature to prevent misidentification and ensure the safe utilization of these plants. This observation is consistent with the literature, which often discusses the challenges posed by shared common names in ethnobotanical and medicinal plant research, emphasizing the importance of accurate botanical identification (Özgen and Kaya 2004; Akgül et al. 2018; Sargın and Büyükcengiz 2019; Yeşil and İnal 2019; Demir and Ayaz 2022). The study employs a quantitative approach to assess the CI of plant species, shedding light on their significance in the culinary and cultural heritage of the region. Within the “Vegetables” use-category, 128 plant species are identified, with a cumulative CI value of 80.87, averaging 0.68 CI per species. The subcategory VEGc displays the highest representation, encompassing 85 species, with a substantial CI total of 51.00 and an average CI of 0.60 per species. On the other hand, VEGr vegetables comprise 61 species, with a CI total of 26.66. This information underscores the understanding that indigenous communities do not uniformly consume all wild edible plants but make selective choices rooted in a complex interplay of religious beliefs, tradition, oral history, and practical knowledge. Their decisions about which plants to gather and consume are guided by cultural considerations, reflecting a profound awareness of the local flora’s cultural and culinary significance.

Conclusion

The categorization of plants based on their edible components and culinary techniques provided valuable insights into the adaptability and versatility of Sivas’ traditional cuisine. Within our results, the Asteraceae family emerged as the most diverse, with several other families making notable contributions to the local flora. This diversity among plant families underscores their ecological and cultural importance. The edible components encompass a wide range, including leaves, seeds, flowers, roots, tubers, subterranean parts, gums, fruits, branches, and more, emphasizing the profound link between these plants and local culinary practices. Moreover, our study unveiled common names shared by different plant species, suggesting potential cultural and culinary connections among these plants. This linguistic dimension adds an additional layer of complexity to the cultural importance of these species. In summary, this study not only enriches our understanding of the diverse plant species in Sivas traditional culture but also highlights the deep-seated relationship between these plants and the local way of life. The findings are of great significance for the preservation and appreciation of Sivas traditional knowledge and practices related to plants and ethnobotany, providing a valuable resource for both researchers and conservationists.