VEJ,
Try viewing the minimum speed schedules as just that .. a minimum below which the risks of mishap increase unacceptably due to the aircraft's getting a bit too close to the boundary flight conditions, mainly Vs. The minimum speeds try to protect us, somewhat, against our propensity for manipulative heavy-handedness and distraction.
Therefore it is prudent to apply the published minimum values whenever you are in the relevant configuration.
For a smaller aircraft such at the Dash, and I don't have a specimen AFM on hand to check, the limitations may be scheduled conservatively without clarification as to phase of flight. If that is the case then, in the absence of other AFM advice, it would be prudent to use the more (most) conservative data for phases of flight which don't appear to have specific limitations published. The principal aim is to keep a reasonable margin above current stall speed.
It might be useful if you go to the FAA website and review the current regulatory words in the FARs for background. At the very least this will show you where the data in downfourgreen's post originate via the AFM (but be aware that the current published FAR requirements might be a little different to those which were current at the time that the design standards were frozen for any given make and model of aircraft).
. .The bank angle consideration relates to the variation of load factor ("g" if you prefer) with bank which, in effect, causes the wing to think that the aircraft gross weight is varying. This, in turn, affects the present stall speed value.
The bank angles published in the manufacturer's AFM or FCOM (or by the operator's ops engineers in the company operations manual) relate to the increase in actual stall speed (it might be easier to think of this in terms of the "equivalent" weight increase) needed to trip the stick shaker for the current configuration.
. .Does this help ? .. or merely muddy the waters further ? .. it is never easy to explain things in text when a picture makes it much easier.