The Meaning of Plants' Names: A New Discovering Approach to Its Medicinal and/or Toxic Properties

**Background:** The scientific and vernacular names of plants often encode information about their potential medicinal or toxic properties. While traditional approaches to drug discovery include random collection, chemotaxonomy, chemical ecology, and ethnopharmacology, the authors propose that plant lexicons—the meanings embedded in genus names, specific epithets, and vernacular names—represent an underexplored source of clues. This study aimed to systematically list plants whose names suggest biological activity and compare these lexical indications with ethnobotanical/ethnopharmacological (“ethno”) and pharmacological data from the scientific literature.

**Methods:** Two classic reference works on Brazilian medicinal plants were consulted: “Dicionário das plantas úteis do Brasil e das exóticas cultivadas” by Pio Correa (six volumes, ~10,000 species) and “Plantas medicinais no Brasil. Nativas e exóticas” by Lorenzi and Matos (~2,800 vernacular names). Through a floating reading, 202 plant species with names alluding to biological activity were initially identified. Of these, 90 species had lexicons directly indicating a specific medicinal or toxic property and were selected for detailed analysis. Latin translations of epithets were performed using dictionaries and specialized references. A bibliographic survey of “ethno” and pharmacological data was conducted in December 2022 across Scopus, PubMed, Scielo, Google Scholar, and Science Direct. Data were categorized into 17 bioprospecting categories (e.g., gastrointestinal, nervous system, parasites) and compared across three dimensions: lexicon, “ethno,” and pharmacology.

**Key Results:** The 90 selected species belonged to 47 families, with Compositae and Fabaceae (5 species each) being the most common. Of these, 56 (62.2%) are native to Brazil. Among the 90 species, 66 (73.3%) had “ethno” data in the literature, and 46 (51.1%) had pharmacological data. Of the 66 with “ethno” data, 46 (69.7%) showed equivalence with the lexical indication. Of the 46 with pharmacological data, 27 (58.7%) showed equivalence. Importantly, of the 45 species that had both “ethno” and pharmacological studies, 22 (48.9%) demonstrated equivalence across all three dimensions. The most frequent categories in the lexicon dimension were poisons (20 species), gastrointestinal problems (13), and nervous system (11). In the “ethno” dimension, the top categories were gastrointestinal problems (21), nervous system (17), and metabolic syndromes (17). In the pharmacological dimension, nervous system and gastrointestinal problems each had 17 species, followed by dermatologic and poisons (9 each). Examples of species with full three-way equivalence include *Eugenia dysenterica* (gastrointestinal), *Tanacetum parthenium* (gynecology), *Leonurus cardiaca* (cardiovascular), and *Operculina macrocarpa* (gastrointestinal).

**Clinical Implications:** This study provides evidence that plant lexicons can be a reliable, low-cost initial screening tool for identifying plants with potential medicinal or toxic properties. The high concordance rate (48.9%) between lexical, ethnobotanical, and pharmacological data suggests that names are not arbitrary but often encode empirical knowledge. This approach could be integrated with existing drug discovery strategies to prioritize plants for pharmacological testing, especially for conditions like gastrointestinal disorders, nervous system ailments, and parasitic infections. The study also highlights 90 species with lexical indications that lack pharmacological investigation, representing a reservoir of candidates for future research. Limitations include the subjective nature of Latin translation and the fact that many species lack comprehensive “ethno” or pharmacological studies. Nonetheless, the method offers a novel, complementary pathway for bioprospecting.