Table 4. Comparison among the clustering methods used for phylogenetic analysis and AFLP-derived dendrograms for combinations #1 to #6 generated by congruence index values (Icong).
| Tree comparison | Leaves | MASTa | Icong | P-value | Congruent |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AFLP 1 vs AFLP 2 | 27 | 13 | 1.714 | 2.19e-05 | Yes |
| AFLP 1 vs AFLP 3 | 26 | 11 | 1.479 | 0.0009 | Yes |
| AFLP 1 vs AFLP 4 | 27 | 12 | 1.583 | 0.0001 | Yes |
| AFLP 1 vs AFLP 5 | 26 | 13 | 1.748 | 1.46e-05 | Yes |
| AFLP 1 vs AFLP 6 | 26 | 13 | 1.748 | 1.46e-05 | Yes |
| AFLP 2 vs AFLP 3 | 27 | 13 | 1.714 | 2.19e-05 | Yes |
| AFLP 2 vs AFLP 4 | 27 | 14 | 1.846 | 2.79e-05 | Yes |
| AFLP 2 vs AFLP 5 | 27 | 14 | 1.846 | 2.79e-05 | Yes |
| AFLP 2 vs AFLP 6 | 27 | 13 | 1.714 | 2.19e-05 | Yes |
| AFLP 3 vs AFLP 4 | 27 | 16 | 2.110 | 4.54e-08 | Yes |
| AFLP 3 vs AFLP 5 | 26 | 12 | 1.613 | 0.0001 | Yes |
| AFLP 3 vs AFLP 6 | 26 | 11 | 1.479 | 0.0009 | Yes |
| AFLP 4 vs AFLP 5 | 27 | 15 | 1.978 | 3.56e-07 | Yes |
| AFLP 4 vs AFLP 6 | 27 | 11 | 1.451 | 0.0013 | Yes |
| AFLP 5 vs AFLP 6 | 26 | 14 | 1.882 | 1.82e-06 | Yes |
| AFLP 1 vs Cal | 26 | 11 | 1.479 | 0.0009 | Yes |
| AFLP 2 vs Cal | 27 | 12 | 1.583 | 0.0001 | Yes |
| AFLP 3 vs Cal | 26 | 10 | 1.344 | 0.0075 | Yes |
| AFLP 4 vs Cal | 27 | 23 | 3.034 | 2.46e-14 | Yes |
| AFLP 5 vs Cal | 26 | 12 | 1.613 | 0.0001 | Yes |
| AFLP 6 vs Cal | 26 | 10 | 1.344 | 0.0075 | Yes |
a MAST, Maximum Agreement Subtree.