Taxonomic reappraisal of the mangrove genus Avicennia (Acanthaceae) in India
Data files
Mar 11, 2026 version files 98.30 KB
-
Fig._4_data.xlsx
37.19 KB
-
Fig._5_data.xlsx
21.58 KB
-
Fig._6_data.xlsx
19.28 KB
-
Fig._9_data.xlsx
12.87 KB
-
PERMANOVA_test_code.txt
596 B
-
R_code_for_map_making_for_Fig._9.txt
1.20 KB
-
R_code_for_PCA_for_Fig._4__5_and_6.txt
1.68 KB
-
README.md
3.90 KB
Abstract
A taxonomic reappraisal of the mangrove genus Avicennia in India was undertaken through extensive field surveys and critical examination of herbarium specimens. Three taxa, Avicennia alba, A. marina subsp. marina, and A. officinalis, are described in detail. A synonymic list was compiled using the World Checklist of Vascular Plants (WCVP) and assessed through analysis of protologues and original material, with accompanying nomenclatural notes. Accordingly, four lectotypes and one neotype were designated. Leaf forms were investigated using principal component analysis (PCA), as foliar characters have historically served as important criteria for delimiting taxa within the genus. PCA was conducted under four approaches: (1) among A. alba, A. marina, and A. officinalis; (2) among four infraspecific taxa of A. marina; (3) across populations from the three major coastal regions of India; and (4) between A. marina subsp. marina and A. marina var. acutissima. In all cases, the analysis indicated that leaf form alone could not reliably distinguish taxa. However, PERMANOVA using quantitative variables employed in PCA showed that, in first two cases, the differences among Avicennia species and among the infraspecific taxa of A. marina were statistically significant. In contrast, the differences among A. marina populations from the three major coastal regions of India, as well as between A. marina subsp. marina and A. marina var. acutissima, were weak. Phylogenetic analysis using ITS sequences from India and other Indo–West Pacific Avicennia accessions showed broad concordance with established multilocus frameworks; however, several GenBank accessions displayed incongruent placements, suggesting probable misidentifications. Similarly, inconsistency in GBIF occurrence records further points to widespread identification errors. The findings also indicate that A. officinalis populations from India are morphologically distinct from conspecific populations in Australasia, highlighting taxonomic complexity within the genus. To facilitate identification, a taxonomic key to Avicennia taxa in India is provided.
Dataset DOI: 10.5061/dryad.fqz612k62
Description of the data and file structure
Description of the data
Figure 4, 5, 6 and 9 were generated based on the 'Fig. 4 data.xlsx', 'Fig. 5 data.xlsx', 'Fig. 5 data.xlsx' and 'Fig. 9 data.xlsx' files respectively.
The R script used to generate Fig. 4, 5 and 6 is available in 'R code for PCA for Fig. 4, 5 and 6.txt' file.
The R script used to generate Fig. 9 is available in 'R code for map making for Fig. 9.txt' file.
The PERMANOVA analysis was performed using the R script avialble in 'PERMANOVA test code.txt' file. The variables LA, L:W, L:P, L:M, LT, and LB were used in this analysis, and the data were derived from the files 'Fig. 4 data.xlsx', 'Fig. 5 data.xlsx' and 'Fig. 6 data.xlsx'.
Abbreviations used:
AA = Avicennia alba;
AM = A. marina;
AO = A. officinalis;
AM acu = Avicennia marina var. acutissima;
AM aus = Avicennia marina subsp. australasica;
AM euc = Avicennia marina subsp. eucalyptifolia;
AM mar = Avicennia marina subsp. marina;
LA = leaf area (cm2);
L:W = leaf length (cm) to leaf width (cm) ratio;
L:P = leaf length (cm) to petiole length (cm) ratio;
L:M = leaf length (cm) to the distance from the leaf base to the widest point along the midvein (cm);
LT = leaf tip angle (degree);
LB = leaf base angle (degree).
Files and variables
File: Fig._4_data.xlsx
Description: In 'Fig. 4 data.xlsx' file, Specimen IDs 1–8, 25–51, 56–116, and 121–122 (see the Excel sheet “Fig. 4 data”) correspond to the barcodes of herbarium specimens. The remaining specimen IDs (starting with “A”) represent our own collections deposited in the BURD Herbarium.
Two leaves from each herbarium specimen were measured. Consequently, each specimen number appears twice in the dataset. Detailed information for each specimen is provided in the manuscript under the section 'Additional specimens examined'.
Variables
- 'Species' was treated as the independent variable, while LA, L:W, L:P, L:M, LT, and LB were used as dependent variables.
File: Fig._5_data.xlsx
Description: In 'Fig. 5 data.xlsx', Specimen IDs are same as “Fig. 4 data.xlsx” file.
Variables
- 'Species' was treated as the independent variable. The dependent variables included L:W, L:P, L:M, LT, and LB.
File: Fig._6_data.xlsx
Description: In 'Fig. 6 data.xlsx', Specimen IDs are same as “Fig. 4 data.xlsx” file.
Variables
- 'Species' and 'India' were treated as independent variables. The dependent variables included L:W, L:P, L:M, LT, and LB.
File: Fig._9_data.xlsx
Description: Figure 9 was generated using the dataset provided in the Excel file entitled “Fig. 9 data.xlsx”. In this file, the column labelled “Places” includes the mangrove areas of India.
Variables
- Species, Latitude, Longitude and Place.
File: R_code_for_map_making_for_Fig._9.txt
Description: The R script used to make Fig. 9 map is given.
Variables
- Species, Latitude, Longitude and Place.
File: PERMANOVA_test_code.txt
Description: The PERMANOVA analysis was performed using the R script and the data from the files 'Fig. 4 data.xlsx', 'Fig. 5 data.xlsx' and 'Fig. 6 data.xlsx'.
Variables
- The variables LA, L:W, L:P, L:M, LT, and LB were used in this analysis.
File: R_code_for_PCA_for_Fig._4__5_and_6.txt
Description: R script used to generate Fig. 4, 5 and 6.
Variables
-
'Species' and 'India' were treated as independent variables. The dependent variables included L:W, L:P, L:M, LT, and LB.
Access information
Other publicly accessible locations of the data:
- N/A
Data was derived from the following sources:
- N/A