Table 3 Quantitative analysis of medicinal plant use across 20 use categories in three urban markets based on vendor reports in Harare, Zimbabwe
Use category | URAll | URCBD | URMbare | URHighfield | NTAll | NTCBD | NTMbare | NTHighfield | ICFAll | ICFCBD | ICFMbare | ICFHighfield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AB | 30 | 9 | 12 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
AIDS | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0.667 | NA | NA | 0 |
AP | 45 | 4 | 27 | 14 | 14 | 3 | 10 | 5 | 0.705 | 0.333 | 0.654 | 0.692 |
CA | 2 | 2 | – | – | 1 | 1 | – | – | 1 | 1 | – | – |
DE | 15 | 3 | 9 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0.857 | 1 | 0.875 | 0 |
DU | 13 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 0.833 | 1 | 0.6 | 1 |
ES | 20 | 7 | 9 | 4 | 6 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 0.737 | 0.5 | 0.75 | 0.667 |
FI | 42 | 7 | 16 | 19 | 19 | 4 | 11 | 9 | 0.561 | 0.5 | 0.333 | 0.556 |
GA | 141 | 31 | 72 | 38 | 28 | 8 | 26 | 12 | 0.807 | 0.767 | 0.648 | 0.703 |
GU | 8 | 2 | 3 | – | 2 | 1 | 1 | – | 0.857 | 1 | 1 | – |
GY | 37 | 10 | 17 | 10 | 9 | 3 | 6 | 6 | 0.778 | 0.778 | 0.688 | 0.444 |
HD | 5 | 2 | 3 | – | 1 | 1 | 1 | – | 1 | 1 | 1 | – |
IB | 11 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | NA |
LA | 20 | 2 | 10 | 8 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0.842 | 1 | 0.889 | 0.857 |
LP | 5 | – | 2 | 3 | 2 | – | 2 | 2 | 0.75 | – | 0 | 0.5 |
LU | 28 | 2 | 13 | 13 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0.889 | 1 | 0.917 | 0.833 |
MA | 11 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0.9 | NA | 0.75 | 0.75 |
NB | 2 | 1 | 1 | – | 1 | 1 | 1 | – | 1 | NA | NA | – |
RE | 31 | 8 | 15 | 8 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 0.8 | 0.429 | 0.714 | 0.714 |
STIs | 60 | 10 | 33 | 17 | 16 | 4 | 13 | 6 | 0.746 | 0.667 | 0.625 | 0.688 |