ALHAGI MAURORUM AND TAMARIX APHYLLA -TWO MEDICINAL WEEDS MENTIONED IN HOLY QURAN AND AHADITH AND THEIR ETHNOMEDICINAL USES IN DISTRICT RAJHANPUR OF PAKISTAN
The present research work is based on two medicinal weeds: Alhagi maurorum and Tamarix aphylla (L.) mentioned in the 57 Ayat of Sura Al-Baqarah and 16 Ayat of Sura Saba in Holy Quran respectively. These plants were collected from Rajhanpur District, Punjab, Pakistan. The foremost purpose of this study is to document the knowledge of the ethnomedicinal significance of these plants in the light of Islam. An extensive and complete data was recorded. The comprehensive morphological character of these species was discussed. Botanical names, family, Quranic name, Arabic name, English name, Vernicular name, habit and habitat, distribution, parts used, medicinal uses are documented and references cited from Holy Quran, Ahadith.
Peer Review History:
Article received on- 9 August; Revised on- 15 September; Accepted on- 25 September 2016, Available online 15 November 2016
UJPR follows the most transparent and toughest ‘Advanced OPEN peer review’ system. The identity of the authors and, reviewers will be known to each other. This transparent process will help to eradicate any possible malicious/purposeful interference by any person (publishing staff, reviewer, editor, author, etc) during peer review. As a result of this unique system, all reviewers will get their due recognition and respect, once their names are published in the papers. We expect that, by publishing peer review reports with published papers, will be helpful to many authors for drafting their article according to the specifications. Auhors will remove any error of their article and they will improve their article(s) according to the previous reports displayed with published article(s). The main purpose of it is ‘to improve the quality of a candidate manuscript’. Our reviewers check the ‘strength and weakness of a manuscript honestly’. There will increase in the perfection, and transparency.
Average Peer review marks at initial stage: 6.0/10
Average Peer review marks at publication stage: 7.5/10