Chenopodium album (fat hen)
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Distribution Table
- Habitat List
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
- Biology and Ecology
- Natural enemies
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Uses List
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.Generate report
PicturesTop of page
IdentityTop of page
Preferred Scientific Name
- Chenopodium album L. 1753
Preferred Common Name
- fat hen
Other Scientific Names
- Chenopodium album subsp. reticulatum (Aellen) Beauge ex Greuter & Burdet
- Chenopodium reticulatum Aellen
International Common Names
- English: bacon-weed; common lambsquarters (US); frost-blite; mealweed; pigweed; white goosefoot
- Spanish: campo; cenizo; chual; quinoa; quniqua del quniquilla; salado; yuyo blanco
- French: anserine blanche; chenopode blanc; farineuse
- Portuguese: acarinha-branca; catassol
Local Common Names
- Brazil: ancarinha-branca
- Denmark: hvidmelet gaasefod
- Ethiopia: amadamddo
- Finland: jauhosavikka
- Germany: Gemeiner gansefuss; Weisser Gansefuss
- India: bathu; bathua; chandan bathua; jhil; kulf; pappu kura; parupu kire; vastuk
- Indonesia: dieng putih
- Iran: salmak
- Italy: farinaccio; selvatico
- Japan: akaza; shiroza
- Netherlands: luismelde
- Norway: meldestokk
- Pakistan: bathwra; jhill
- South Africa: withondebossie
- Sweden: svinmalla; vitmalla
- Taiwan: li
- Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro): pepejiuga
- CHEAL (Chenopodium album)
Summary of InvasivenessTop of page
C. album seems to grow most vigorously in temperate and subtemperate regions, but it is also a potentially serious weed in almost all winter-sown crops of the tropics and subtropics. It is a common weed in about 40 crops in 47 countries, being most frequent in sugarbeet, potatoes, maize and cereals. It is one of the principal weeds of Canada and Europe, and in India, Mexico, New Zealand, Pakistan and South Africa is ranked amongst the six most serious weeds. In temperate climates, it is a problem in almost all summer- and winter-sown crops.
In subtropical regions it is most common in wheat, chickpea, barley, winter vegetables, horticultural gardens, maize, sunflower and soybean. In addition, it is an important weed of tea and upland rice in Japan, citrus orchards and vineyards in Spain, cotton, soyabean and strawberries in the former Soviet Union, cotton, pastures and groundnuts in the USA, rice in Mexico and tobacco in Canada. In Europe and America, it is a problem weed in maize, soybean, wheat, barley, potato and all vegetable crops.
Taxonomic TreeTop of page
- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Plantae
- Phylum: Spermatophyta
- Subphylum: Angiospermae
- Class: Dicotyledonae
- Order: Caryophyllales
- Family: Chenopodiaceae
- Genus: Chenopodium
- Species: Chenopodium album
Notes on Taxonomy and NomenclatureTop of page
The genus Chenopodium comprises around 150 species, of which C. quinoa and C. album are important nutritionally. C. album appears to be free of nomenclature problems, but it has been recorded as hybridizing with a number of members of the genus, namely: C. ficifolium (= C. x zahnii), C. berlandieri (= C. x variabile), C. opulifolium (= C. x preissmannii) and C. suecicum (= C. x fursajewii). The generic name is derived from the Greek word Chen, meaning goose, and the Latin word podium (foot). The species name, album (meaning white) refers to the white-grey grainy particles that are found on the undersides of the leaves.
C. album is somewhat poorly circumscribed taxonomically, and genotypes cultivated in the Himalayas that are assigned to C. album bear little similarity to the weedy form of C. album (Partap et al., 1998). However, C. album and related hexaploid species have a single flavonoid profile that supports the recognition of a single species (Rahiminejad and Gornall, 2004). Studies by Mandák et al. (2012) confirm that Chenopodium species do not hybridize freely across ploidy levels and analysis is DNA content suggests that C. album is an alloploid derivative of a cross between unknown diploid and tetraploid species.
DescriptionTop of page
An erect, branched (occasionally unbranched) annual herb, green, more or less coated with white mealy pubescence. Cotyledons petiole, lanceolate-linear, mealy, bluish-grey with a reddish tinge beneath, 6–12 mm long and 1.5–4 mm broad (Korsmo et al., 1981). Roots stout and tapering at the end. Many branches may emerge from main tap root system. Epidermal cells are more or less polygonal in shape. Fewer, smaller stomata on upper compared to lower leaf surface (Srivastava, 1967). Stems erect, branched towards apex, 0.2–2 m tall, glabrous, furrowed, often with red or light-green streaks, branching varies from slight to extensive. Leaves alternate, simple ovate to rhomboid-oval, uppermost leaves mostly lanceolate, sometimes linear and sessile, glabrous, usually white with a mealy-covering, particularly on young leaves, all leaves densely covered with small, utriculate hairs. Inflorescence in irregular spikes clustered in panicles at the ends of the branches. Flower perfect, small, sessile, green; calyx of 5 sepals that are more or less keeled and nearly covering the mature fruit; petals 1; stamens 5, pistil 1, with 2 or 3 styles, ovary single-celled, attached at right angles to the flower axis. Fruits is an achene (seed covered by the thin papery pericarp). Seed nearly circular in outline, oval in cross section, sides convex, glossy, black, mean size 1.5 mm x 1.4 mm in diameter, weight 1.2 mg.
DistributionTop of page
C. album is a cosmopolitan weed which is so widely distributed that its geographical origin is obscured. It is equally widely distributed in both the northern and southern hemispheres, occurring in Asia, North America, Europe (Brenan and Akeroyd, 1993), India, South Africa, Australia and South America (Williams, 1963). It is present throughout North America (Bassett and Crompton, 1978; Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987). In tropical regions it is mostly found at higher altitudes. It is domesticated in the Himalayan region where it is grown as a grain crop and it is cultivated as a traditional leafy vegetable in India (Jansen, 2004). There is archaeological evidence to suggest it was cultivated as a pseudocereal in Europe in prehistory (Stokes and Rowley-Conwy, 2002).
Distribution TableTop of page
The distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.
|Continent/Country/Region||Distribution||Last Reported||Origin||First Reported||Invasive||Reference||Notes|
|Afghanistan||Present||Holm et al., 1991|
|Bangladesh||Present||Holm et al., 1991|
|China||Widespread||Wang, 1990; Holm et al., 1991|
|India||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|-Himachal Pradesh||Widespread||Saraswat, 1993|
|-Indian Punjab||Widespread||Saraswat, 1993|
|-Jammu and Kashmir||Widespread||Hooker, 1885|
|-Madhya Pradesh||Widespread||Rajput et al., 1993|
|-Rajasthan||Widespread||Yadav et al., 1995|
|-Uttar Pradesh||Widespread||Saraswat, 1993|
|-West Bengal||Widespread||Hooker, 1885|
|Indonesia||Present||Holm et al., 1977|
|Iran||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Iraq||Present||Holm et al., 1991|
|Israel||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Japan||Widespread||Numata and Yoshikawa, 1975; Holm et al., 1991|
|Korea, Republic of||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Mongolia||Widespread||Malik and Tsedev, 1996|
|Nepal||Present||Holm et al., 1991|
|Pakistan||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Saudi Arabia||Present||Chaudhary et al., 1981|
|Sri Lanka||Widespread||Sen, 1981|
|Taiwan||Present||Holm et al., 1991|
|Turkey||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|United Arab Emirates||Present||Chaudhary et al., 1981|
|Yemen||Present||Chaudhary et al., 1981|
|Algeria||Present||Holm et al., 1991|
|Botswana||Present||Wells et al., 1986; Brenan, 1988|
|East Africa||Present||Holm et al., 1977|
|Ethiopia||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Kenya||Present||Holm et al., 1991|
|Lesotho||Present||Wells et al., 1986|
|Morocco||Present||Holm et al., 1991|
|Namibia||Present||Wells et al., 1986|
|South Africa||Widespread||Wells et al., 1986; Holm et al., 1991|
|Swaziland||Present||Wells et al., 1986|
|Tanzania||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Tunisia||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Uganda||Widespread||Dyer and Thisleton, 1979|
|Zimbabwe||Present||Brenan, 1988; Holm et al., 1991|
|Canada||Widespread||Bassett and Crompton, 1978; Holm et al., 1991|
|Mexico||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|USA||Widespread||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987; Holm et al., 1991|
|-Alaska||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|-Hawaii||Present||Haselwood and Motter, 1966|
|Argentina||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Brazil||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|-Mato Grosso do Sul||Present||Lorenzi, 1982|
|-Minas Gerais||Present||Lorenzi, 1982|
|-Rio de Janeiro||Present||Lorenzi, 1982|
|-Rio Grande do Sul||Present||Lorenzi, 1982|
|-Santa Catarina||Present||Lorenzi, 1982|
|-Sao Paulo||Present||Lorenzi, 1982|
|Chile||Widespread||Holm et al., 1977|
|Colombia||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Peru||Present||Aragon and Gutierrez, 1992|
|Belgium||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Bulgaria||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Czechoslovakia (former)||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Denmark||Present||Holm et al., 1991|
|Finland||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|France||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Germany||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Hungary||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Italy||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Netherlands||Present||Holm et al., 1991|
|Norway||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Poland||Present||Holm et al., 1991; Kubat et al., 1996|
|Portugal||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Romania||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Russian Federation||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Spain||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Sweden||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Switzerland||Present||Holm et al., 1991|
|UK||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Ukraine||Widespread||Manko et al., 1996|
|Yugoslavia (former)||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|Australia||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
|-Australian Northern Territory||Present||Lazarides et al., 1997|
|-New South Wales||Present||Lazarides et al., 1997|
|-Queensland||Present||Lazarides et al., 1997|
|-South Australia||Present||Lazarides et al., 1997|
|-Tasmania||Present||Lazarides et al., 1997|
|-Victoria||Present||Lazarides et al., 1997|
|-Western Australia||Present||Lazarides et al., 1997|
|New Zealand||Widespread||Holm et al., 1991|
HabitatTop of page C. album occurs from sea level to altitudes of 3600 m, and from latitudes 70°N to more than 50°S. It is a common weed of almost all cultivated crops, gardens, horticultural crops and orchards. It is also found on wasteland, in pastures and strips of uncultivated land, and along roadsides and riverbanks. It is tolerant of a wide range of cultural conditions, climates, soil types, fertility and pH, a fact reflected in Coquilat's (1951) suggestion that it is one of the five most widely distributed plants in the world. It is most vigorous in fertile, heavy and well-irrigated soils (reaching up to 2 m in height), often remaining as a dwarf in dryer and less fertile soils.
Habitat ListTop of page
Hosts/Species AffectedTop of page
C. album seems to grow most vigorously in temperate and subtemperate regions, however it is also a potentially serious weed in almost all winter-sown crops of the tropics and subtropics. It is a common weed in about 40 crops in 47 countries, being most frequent in sugarbeet, potatoes, corn and cereals. It is one of the principal weeds of Canada and Europe, and in India, Mexico, New Zealand, Pakistan and South Africa is ranked amongst the six most serious weeds (Holm et al., 1977). In temperate climates, it is a problem in almost all summer- and winter-sown crops.
In subtropical regions it is most common in wheat, chickpea, barley, winter vegetables, horticultural gardens, maize, sunflower and soybean. In addition, it is an important weed of tea and upland rice in Japan, citrus orchards and vineyards in Spain, cotton, soyabean and strawberries in the former Soviet Union, cotton, pastures and peanuts in the USA, rice in Mexico and tobacco in Canada (Holm et al., 1977). In Europe and America, it is a problem weed in maize, soybean, wheat, barley, potato and all vegetable crops.
Host Plants and Other Plants AffectedTop of page
|Ananas comosus (pineapple)||Bromeliaceae||Other|
|Arachis hypogaea (groundnut)||Fabaceae||Main|
|Beta vulgaris var. saccharifera (sugarbeet)||Chenopodiaceae||Main|
|Brassica oleracea var. capitata (cabbage)||Brassicaceae||Main|
|Camellia sinensis (tea)||Theaceae||Main|
|Cicer arietinum (chickpea)||Fabaceae||Main|
|Fragaria ananassa (strawberry)||Rosaceae||Main|
|Glycine max (soyabean)||Fabaceae||Main|
|Helianthus annuus (sunflower)||Asteraceae||Main|
|Hordeum vulgare (barley)||Poaceae||Main|
|Ipomoea batatas (sweet potato)||Convolvulaceae||Other|
|Linum usitatissimum (flax)||Main|
|Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)||Solanaceae||Main|
|Oryza sativa (rice)||Poaceae||Main|
|Piper nigrum (black pepper)||Piperaceae||Other|
|Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)||Poaceae||Other|
|Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)||Solanaceae||Main|
|Solanum tuberosum (potato)||Solanaceae||Main|
|Sorghum bicolor (sorghum)||Poaceae||Main|
|Triticum aestivum (wheat)||Poaceae||Main|
|Vitis vinifera (grapevine)||Vitaceae||Main|
|Zea mays (maize)||Poaceae||Main|
Biology and EcologyTop of page
C. album reproduces solely by seed. Individuals of this species demonstrate a great deal of plasticity in response to their edaphic and biotic environment, and seed production varies greatly according to these factors. Average seed production varies between 3000 and 20,000 seeds/plant Korsmo et al. (1981), but as many as 50,000–70,000 seeds per plant have been found Mandal and Pal (1990). Seeds are able to remain viable for extended periods in the soil seed bank, perhaps for up to 40 years Toole and Brown (1946). The seeds exhibit considerable polymorphy; some are smooth, some striate, and others possess a raised reticulum. Testa colour also varies significantly and can be black and shiny, brown or brownish-green. All of these variations in colour and form may be found in the seeds of a single plant (Holm et al., 1977). It appears that different seed morphs vary in their dormancy and germination requirements. This variation enables the species to germinate under a range of environmental conditions and may contribute greatly to its success as a weed (Maurya and Ambasht, 1973). C. album is autogamous but also wind pollinated, and flowers are occasionally visited by insects (Blackwell and Powell, 1981). C. album has no specialized seed dispersal mechanisms, so that the majority of seeds simply fall to the ground around the parent plant. They are not buoyant, but may be transported long distances by water. A percentage of seed also passes unharmed through animals and may be transported in this way (Holm et al., 1977).
Typically, freshly harvested seeds exhibit approximately 35% germinability. Low-temperature treatments of between 0°C and 5°C increase germination, as do alternating low and high temperatures, scarification and prolonged soaking over 20 days. Germination is slow for seeds following dry, indoor storage, but rapid for seeds overwintered in the field. In general, germination optima for this species are at 10°C in India, and 25°C in Canada, reflecting the fact that in temperate countries C. album usually behaves as a summer annual and in subtropical countries as a winter annual. Two distinct germination peaks have been recorded in Europe, one between March and May and a second between August and October (Fryer and Makepeace, 1977). In colder climates maximum seedling emergence has been observed between May and July with a peak in the last two weeks of June (Lapointe et al., 1985). The maximum depth from which buried seed is able to emerge is 5 cm (Korsmo et al., 1981), and percentage germination is greatest from seeds lying at, or just below the soil surface.
C. album will flower in any daylength, but an 8-hour photoperiod considerably hastens flowering and maturity. Larger, more vigorous plants result from a long photoperiod (16–18 hours), and for this reason the species is more extensively distributed in temperate zones and sparsely distributed around the equator (Holm et al., 1977). The detailed review by Bassett and Crompton (1978) provides some further information.
C. album occurs from sea level to altitudes of 3600 m, and from latitudes 70°N to more than 50°S. It is a common weed of almost all cultivated crops and found on wasteland, in pastures and strips of uncultivated land, and along roadsides and riverbanks. It is tolerant of a wide range of cultural conditions, climates, soil types, fertility and pH. Growing in temperatures of 5–30°C it is frost tolerant. It is most vigorous in fertile, heavy and well-irrigated soils (reaching up to 2 m in height), often remaining as a dwarf in dryer and less fertile soils.
The size, vigour and reproductive capacity of individual plants is affected by intraspecific competition, but less so by competition from wheat (Williams, 1964; Koblihova et al., 1987). Seed production potential, therefore, varies greatly according to the density of weed populations, and agronomic practices which result in a thick canopy cover will lead to less seed return to the seed bank, as increased density results in shorter plants, fewer inflorescences and reduced seed production.
Natural enemiesTop of page
Notes on Natural EnemiesTop of page A downy mildew caused by Peronospora sp. has been reported as an important disease of the grain cereal, Chenopodium quinoa, which is cultivated in Peru. The same disease has been observed on the weedy species C. album, C. murale and C. ambrosioides (Aragon and Guttierez, 1992).
Meloidogyne hapla (a root nematode) was reported on roots of C. album occurring in Kiwi plantations in Basilicata (Ciancio et al., 1992). Heterodera spp., a genus of cyst nematodes, also infect C. album (Bendixen and Rao, 1981).
Some further organisms are listed by Bassett and Crompton (1978).
ImpactTop of page Introduction
C. album is responsible for important economic losses in agriculture around the world. Except in the extreme desert climate, C. album is found in all inhabited areas of the world where it thrives on all soil types and over a wide range of pH values (Holm et al., 1977). A survey conducted in Canada in 1991 showed that weeds caused estimated average annual losses of $984 million (Swanton et al., 1993). In the USA, a similar survey conducted on 46 crops showed average annual losses of $4.1 billion with current control strategies and $19.6 billion if herbicides were not available (Bridges and Anderson, 1992). Among the weeds implicated with those losses, C. album has been classified as one of the world's worst (Holm et al., 1977; Mitich, 1988). Its worldwide distribution, its ability to colonise new habitats and produce large quantities of seeds with viability extended over several years, its allelopathic potential, as well as the evolution of herbicide resistant biotypes have made C. album a major weed problem in agriculture (Holm et al., 1977; Mitich, 1988; Holt and Lebaron, 1990).
Direct Crop Losses
C. album reduces crop yield by direct competition for light and nutrients. In field and greenhouse experiments, important losses due to C. album have been reported on many crops including maize, soyabeans, tomato, oat, barley, lucerne, and sugarbeet. At the density of 172 to 300 plants/m², C. album was reported to cause between 6 and 58% yield loss in maize in field experiments in Canada (Sibuga and Bandeen, 1980; Ngouajio et al., 1999). In Spain, Torner et al. (1995) reported 22.3% maize yield loss in irrigated field experiments when maize was allowed to compete with C. album at equivalent densities. In the USA, 59% maize yield losses were attributed to uncontrolled populations of C. album in field experiments (Dyck and Liebman, 1995). At a density of 1.6 C. album plants/m of soyabean row, Shurtleff and Coble (1985) observed 15% loss of soyabean seed yield in North Carolina, USA. In Iowa, USA, Staniforth and Lovely (1964) observed about 35% soyabean yield losses due to a natural weed population composed mainly of C. album. In tomato, field experiments conducted in the USA using 64 C. album plants/m of row showed 36% losses of marketable fruits (Bhowmik and Reddy, 1988). In oats, C. album interference in field experiments conducted in Canada caused about 60% losses of grain yield when the weed was allowed to compete with the crop for the entire growing season (Lapointe et al., 1985). Losses of 23-36% of barley yield were attributed to C. album competition in the USA (Conn and Thomas, 1987). Under greenhouse conditions in Canada, about 23% reduction of lucerne biomass yield was recorded by Lapointe et al. (1985) as a direct result of C. album competition.
In field studies conducted in Colorado, USA, sugarbeet root yield was reduced by 48% when competing with ca one C. album plant/m of row (Schweizer, 1983). When sugarbeet was grown with 13 C. album plants/m of row that emerged 10 days after the crop, root yield was reduced by 72% in Japan (Watanabe and Hirokawa, 1975). In contrast, when 22 C. album plants/m² were allowed to emerge simultaneously with sugarbeet in Wageningen, The Netherlands, yield losses as high as 93% were obtained (Kropff and Spitters, 1991; Kropff et al., 1992). When grown with a high density of 170 C. album plants/m², sugarbeet root yield was reduced by 86% (Holm et al., 1977). While yield losses due to C. album vary according to crop, weed density and location, in all cases reported, the crop losses were of significant economic impact.
Crop seed contamination by weed seeds not only contributes to weed propagation, but also causes important losses in crop seed quality and value. C. album seeds are very small and frequently contaminate crop seeds harvested from weed infested fields (Holm et al., 1977). For example, C. album seeds are frequently found as impurities in many cereal seeds. Williams (1963) reported a carrot contamination rate of one-third at an official seed testing station in the UK. In the USA, contamination of legume seed by C. album has also been reported (Isely, 1960).
While allelopathic effects of crop plants or crop residues on weeds are beneficial to farmers, the reverse may cause important economic losses. C. album has been reported to exhibit allelopathic effects on crop plants including maize, soyabeans, carrots, cucumbers, onions, tomatoes, sunflowers, lettuce, squash (Cucurbita maxima) and oats (Bhowmik, 1982; Reinhardt et al. 1994). In the USA, C. album residues were reported to cause 15-30% reduction of maize and soyabean growth under field conditions (Bhowmik and Doll, 1980) and 16-20% soyabean yield losses under glasshouse conditions (Bhowmik, 1982). In laboratory and greenhouse studies conducted in South Africa, Reinhardt et al. (1994) reported 68, 85, 47 and 51% growth inhibition by C. album residues on cucumbers, onions, tomatoes and sunflowers, respectively.
The loss of herbicide activity as a result of evolution of resistance among weed populations has become a major concern in agricultural communities over the last three decades (Holt and Lebaron, 1990; Holt, 1992). C. album has been selected for resistance to several herbicides including triazines, substituted ureas, bromoxynil and pyrazon (Solymosi et al., 1986; Vencill and Foy, 1988; De Prado et al., 1989; Hagood, 1989; Holt and Lebaron, 1990; Myers and Harvey, 1993; Glenn et al., 1997). Herbicide-resistant biotypes of C. album have been reported in many countries including Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Italy, France, Germany, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, The Netherlands, the UK and the USA (Heap, 2000). C. album resistance to herbicides has an important economic impact on agricultural production. Resistant biotypes cause direct losses from competition, especially in no-till production systems. Their control requires the use of alternative herbicides or integrated management systems that include herbicide combinations as well as non-chemical methods (Hagood, 1989; Holt and Lebaron, 1990; Holt, 1992; Myers and Harvey, 1993; Glenn et al., 1997). The additional cost of controlling resistant weed biotypes may increase total farm inputs.
Indirect Crop Losses
As an alternate host of several economically important pests and diseases, C. album is responsible for important indirect losses in agriculture. C. album was reported to be the host of a new plant disease caused by the fungus Stagonospora atriplicis in New Zealand (McKenzie and Dingley, 1996). In Japan, C. album was reported to be a host for Polymyxa betae (Abe and Ui, 1986). This fungus is a vector of rhizomania of sugarbeet caused by beet necrotic yellow vein virus (BNYVV) (Abe and Tamada, 1986). P. betae isolated from C. album was also reported to thrive on other plant species including spinach (Spinacia oleracea) (Abe and Ui, 1986). C. album is also the alternate host of several crop viruses. In the UK, Stevens et al. (1994) showed that C. album was susceptible to beet yellows virus (BYV). This disease, transmitted primarily by the aphid Myzus persicae, is responsible for up to 47% sugarbeet losses (Smith and Hallsworth, 1990). In the USA, C. album was reported to be a successful host of peanut stunt cucumovirus (Gillaspie and Ghabrial, 1998). In India, Sharma et al. (1998) showed that prunus necrotic ring spot virus (PNRSV) was transmitted to C. album, which was also shown to be susceptible to potato viruses M and S (Ksiazek, 1976).
In Quebec, Canada, Bélair and Benoit (1996) reported C. album as an alternate host for the northern root-knot nematode Meloidogyne halpa. This nematode is a major constraint to carrot production in southwestern Quebec. The potato root-knot nematode, Ditylenchus destructor, was shown to infest C. album in South Africa, and thereby survive between crop seasons (De Waele et al., 1990). In South Africa, this nematode is also an important pest of groundnut. In Utah, USA, the insect Pemphigus betae (Homoptera: Aphididae) was shown to have a life cycle that alternates between cottonwood trees (Populus angustifolia) and the roots of C. album (Moran and Whitham, 1988). The beet leafhopper and the common stalkborer are insects that live on C. album, but spread to sugarbeet, tomatoes, corn and certain flowers (Wright, 1972; Mitich, 1988).
C. album is toxic to humans and animals. It produces pollen that causes hay fever (Wodehouse, 1971). C. album produces high concentrations of nitrate and oxalic acid, which are poisonous to many animals including swine and sheep when eaten in large quantities (Kingsbury, 1964; Schmutz et al., 1968; Everist, 1979). When eaten by dairy cows, C. album causes taint in milk (Mitich, 1988). Between 1951 and 1960 the estimated losses of beef cattle due to poisonous plants in 11 western states of the USA were over $17 million (Schmutz et al., 1968). According to the same source, losses of sheep and wool were estimated at nearly $6 million. In 1988, estimated losses of cattle and sheep in 17 western states of the USA were $145,330,080 and $23,779,350 respectively (Nielsen et al., 1988; Frandsen and Boe, 1991); C. album is one of the major species associated with those losses (Lorenz and Dewey, 1988).
UsesTop of page
A number of uses have been reported for C. album. The leaves and tender branches may be used as a vegetable in many parts of the world, and also in India in the production of a curd, known locally as Raita (Maheshwari, 1963). Young shoots are boiled and eaten often with other vegetables. They are often dried and stored for later use (Jansen, 2004). It may also be used as a fodder for livestock.
According to Partap and Kapoor (1985), Himalayan chenopod grain consumption is associated with altitude, low family income and social conservatism. In the Himalayas, where it is grown as a subsistence pseudocereal, seeds are ground into flour for pancakes and bread, and may be boiled for gruel. Porridge is also made using roasted and ground grain. In the past, the seeds of Chenopodium album were harvested all over Europe, to be dried and ground into flour for making bread, cakes and gruel. In parts of the Americas they are still used for that purpose (Hatfield, 1971). Fermented alcoholic drinks are also brewed (Jansen, 2004). Usage depends on cultivar type. Farmers may thin grain crops and use the thinnings at a leafy vegetable. Grain are also used as a poultry and livestock feed. Waste husks were used for washing clothes in the past (Partap et al., 1998).
Various medicinal uses have been reported. The leaves may be taken in the form of an infusion or decoction as a laxative and anthelminthic. It has also been recommended by Hindu physicians as a treatment for hepatic disorders and splenic enlargement (Chopra et al., 1958). The finely powdered leaf is used by Zulus as a dusting powder to allay irritation about the external genitalia of children (Watt and Breyer-Brandwijk, 1962). Seeds are used traditionally to improve the appetite and as an anthelmintic, laxative, aphrodisiac and a tonic. They have also been used to treat biliousness, stomach pains, eye and throat problems, piles, and diseases of blood, heart and spleen (Jansen, 2004). Pharmacological studies have demonstrated that C. album is a good candidate for the development of treatments for muscular spasms and pain (Poonia and Upadhayay, 2015). Methanolic and aqueous leaf extracts of C. album demonstrated antilithiatic effects on experimentally induced urolithiasis in rats compared to a standard antilithiatic agent, cystone (Sikarwar et al., 2017). Tests showed C. album had significant anthelmintic activity against cyathostomins, an important gastrointestinal nematode infecting equids. Their effective control is being compromised by widespread resistance to broad spectrum anthelmintics licenced for use in equids. Thus, C. album has considerable potential as an anthelmintic forage or feed supplement (Peachey et al., 2015).
Research on the medicinal uses and nutritional composition of C. album is comprehensively reviewed by Poonia and Upadhayay (2015).
Uses ListTop of page
Animal feed, fodder, forage
- Fodder/animal feed
- Host of pest
Human food and beverage
- Poisonous to mammals
Similarities to Other Species/ConditionsTop of page A number of other Chenopodium species occur as weeds, including Chenopodium murale (see separate datasheet), which has somewhat broader leaves with a distinctly wedge-shaped leaf base, seeds sharply keeled and a higher seed weight than C. album (Sen, 1981). C. murale is also a common weed which grows abundantly in irrrigated, cultivated fields, gardens and waste ground. Also C. opulifolium, a very widespread species, sometimes commoner than C. album as in East Africa, which differs in having leaves about as broad as long and branches often diverging at a wider angle from the stem. Ivens (1968) has a useful table showing the differences between Chenopodium species occurring in East Africa.
Prevention and ControlTop of page
In India, emergence and establishment of C. album is favoured by sowing in early compared to late November (North-West Asia, particularly India and Pakistan). Populations of this weed can be reduced by effective integrated management involving competitive crop varieties, crop rotation, cross-row sowing, nutrient management and cropping date. Competitive crop varieties can suppress growth of the weed by establishing early canopy cover. In crops such as wheat and barley narrow row spacing, cross row sowing and higher seed rates can further suppress the growth of individuals (Johri et al., 1992).
In areas where the population density of C. album is very high, the stale seed bed technique can be used to encourage weed emergence prior to crop sowing so depleting the soil seed reservoir. Crop rotation and nutrient management can be effectively integrated with other cultural practices for the management of this weed in wheat (Balyan et al., 1988; Bhagawati et al., 1989).
C. album has also been found to be sensitive to flaming (Vanhala, 1996), whilst manual weeding and earthing-up are effective in potato (Jaiswal, 1994). Manual weeding at 25, 40, 55 and 70 days after sowing significantly reduced total weed dry weight and increased wheat yield in trials conducted in Madhya Pradesh, India (Singh and Bajpai, 1992). The major goal of any sustainable cultural control programme should be to prevent the consistent enrichment of the soil seed bank.
Ascochyta caulina, a myco-herbicide, has been used for control of C. album (Horsten and Kempenaar, 1994; Kempenaar, 1995). C. album has been identified among targets for future research into the potential for biological control (Schroeder et al., 1993).
C. album is sensitive to a range of foliage-applied herbicides, including 2,4-D, MCPA, paraquat, bentazone, dichlofop, isoproturon, metoxuron, methabenzthiazuron, sulfosulfuron, metsulfuron-methyl, chlorotoluron, bromoxynil and dicamba. Lorenzi (1984) and Mamarot and Rodriguez (1997) provide suggestions for use of herbicides and herbicide mixtures in a wide range of crops in Brazil and France respectively. Lorenzi indicates resistance to asulam and only moderate susceptibility to acifluorfen, butachlor and metolachlor in Brazil.
Isoproturon alone, isoproturon + dicamba or 2,4-D + isoproturon + surfactant provided the maximum control of C. album in wheat (Malik et al., 1992). C. album control in soybean (Glycine max) was greater with thifensulfuron (Monks et al., 1993). Tank mixtures of bentazone and imazethapyr controlled both redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) and C. album in Phaseolus vulgaris.
Biotypes of this weed, resistant to atrazine, chloridazon and pyridate have been reported (Solymosi and Lehoczki, 1989; Parks et al., 1995). Atrazine-resistant biotypes have been a particular problem in maize, but a combination of reduced herbicide application rates and mechanical cultivation have provided effective alternative control strategies for both triazine-resistant and susceptible C. album biotypes (Parks et al., 1995).
ReferencesTop of page
Amin, M., Mahmood, K., Bodlah, I., 2017. Aphid species (Hemiptera: Aphididae) infesting medicinal and aromatic plants in the Poonch Division of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan., JAPS, Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 27(4):1377-1385 http://www.thejaps.org.pk/docs/v-27-04/42.pdf
Amrita Poonia, Ashutosh Upadhayay, 2015. Chenopodium album Linn: review of nutritive value and biological properties., Journal of Food Science and Technology (Mysore), 52(7):3977-3985 http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs13197-014-1553-x
Atul Bhargava, Sudhir Shukla, Deepak Ohri, 2008. Genotype × environment interaction studies in Chenopodium album L.: an underutilized crop with promising potential., Communications in Biometry and Crop Science, 3(1):3-15 http://agrobiol.sggw.waw.pl/˜cbcs/articles/CBCS_3_1_2.pdf
Balyan RS, Bhan VM, Malik RK, 1988. Effect of herbicides rotation and crop rotation on weed complex. Haryana Agricultural University Journal of Research, 18:100-107.
Bendixen LE, Rao BVV, 1981. Anthropods and nematodes hosted by the World's worst perennial weeds. In: Proceedings, 8th Asian Pacific Weed Science Society. Banglore, India: University of Agricultural Sciences, 175-179.
Bhargava, A., Shukla, S., Dixit, B. S., Bannerji, R., Ohri, D., 2006. Variability and genotype × cutting interactions for different nutritional components in Chenopodium album L., Zahradnictví (Horticultural Science), 33(1):29-38 http://www.cazv.cz
Bindal Gautam, Rathour Rajeev, Sharma, T. R., Rana, J. C., Dev, S. K., 2012. Molecular diversity in the Indian Chenopod (Chenopodium album) as revealed by DNA-based markers., Indian Journal of Genetics and Plant Breeding, 72(4):480-483 http://isgpb.co.in
Blackwell WH, Powell MJ, 1981. A preliminary note on pollination in the Chenopodiaceae, Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 68(4): 524-526, 68(4):524-526
Blecharczyk A, Skrzypczak G, Pudelko J, 1996. Weed seedbank response to continuous cropping and fertilization. In: Brown H, Cussans GW, Devine MD; Duke SO, Fernandez-Quintanilla C, Helweg A, Labrada RE, Landes M, Kudsk P, Streibig JCP, eds. Proceedings of the Second International Weed Control Congress, Copenhagen, Denmark. Slagelse, Denmark: Department of Weed Control and Pesticide Ecology, 247-252.
Brenan JPM, 1988. 133.Chenopodiaceae. In: Launert E, ed. Flora Zambeziaca. Volume 9 Part 1. London, UK: Flora Zambeziaca Managing Committee.
Brenan JPM, Akeroyd JR, 1993. 3. Chenopodium L. In: Tutin TG, Burges NA, Chater AO, Edmondson JR, Heywood VH, Moore DM, Valentine DH, Walters SM, Webb DA, eds. Flora Europaea Volume 1. Psilotaceae to Platanaceae. 2nd edition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 111-114.
Bridges DC, Anderson RL, 1992. Crop losses due to weeds in the United States. In: Anderson RL, Bauman PA, Gianessi LP, eds. Crop losses due to weeds in the Unites States - 1992. Champaign Illinois, USA: Weed Science Society of America, 1-61.
Chander Parkash, 2012. Estimation of genetic variability and implications of direct and indirect effects of different traits on leaf yield in bathua (Chenopodium album)., Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 82(1):71-74
Chopra RN, Chopra IC, Handa KL, Kapur LD, 1958. Indigenous Drugs of India. Calcutta, India: U. N. Dhur & Sons Private Limited.
Cimmino, A., Masi, M., Evidente, M., Evidente, A., 2015. Fungal phytotoxins with potential herbicidal activity to control Chenopodium album., Natural Product Communications, 10(6):1119-1126 http://www.naturalproduct.us/JournalArchive.asp
Coquillat M, 1951. Sur les plantes les plus communes a' la surface du globe. Bulletin Mensuel de la Societe Linneenne de Lyon, 20:165-170.
De Waele D, Jordaan EM, Basson S, 1990. Host status of seven weed species and their effects on Ditylenchus destructor infestation on peanut. Journal of Nematology, 22:292-296.
Dyck E, Liebman M, 1995. Crop-weed interference as influenced by a leguminous or synthetic fertilizer nitrogen source: II. Rotation experiments with crimson clover, field corn, and lambsquarters. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment, 56(2):109-120.
Dyer WT, Thiselton, 1979. Flora of Tropical Africa, Vol. IV. New Delhi, India: A. J. Reprints Agency, 75-79.
Edgecombe WS, 1970. Weeds of Lebanon. Beirut, Lebanon: American University of Beirut.
Everist SL, 1974. Poisonous Plants of Australia. Sydney, Australia: Angus & Robertson.
Frandsen E, Boe D, 1991. Economics of noxious weeds and poisonous plants. In: James LF, Evans JO, Ralphs MH, Child RD, eds. Noxious Range Weeds. Boulder, USA: Westview Press, 442-458.
Fryer JD, Makepeace RJ, 1977. Weed control handbook. Volume I. Principles, including plant growth regulators. Weed control handbook. Volume I. Principles, including plant growth regulators. Blackwell Scientific Publications. Oxford UK, Ed. 6:xvii + 510 pp.
Gesinski, K., Nowak, K., 2011. Comparative analysis of the biological value of protein of Chenopodium quinoa Willd. and Chenopodium album L. Part I. Amino acid composition of the seed protein., Acta Scientiarum Polonorum - Agricultura, 10(3):47-56 http://www.aqua.ar.wroc.pl/acta/pl/full/1/2011/000010201100010000030004700056.pdf
Glauninger J, Holzner W, 1982. Interference between weeds and crops: A review of literature. In: Holzner W, Numata, eds. Biology and Ecology of Weeds. The Hague, Netherlands: Dr T. Junk Publisher, 149-159.
Glenn S, Phillips WHII, Kalnay P, 1997. Long-term control of perennial broadleaf weeds and triazine-resistant common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) in no-till corn (Zea mays). Weed Technology, 11(3):436-443; 18 ref.
Gqaza, B. M., Njume, C., Goduka, N. I., George, G., 2013. Nutritional assessment of Chenopodium album L. (Imbikicane) young shoots and mature plant-leaves consumed in the Eastern Cape province of South Africa., International Proceedings of Chemical, Biological and Environmental Engineering (IPCBEE), 53:97-102 http://www.ipcbee.com/vol53/019-ICNFS2013-F2005.pdf
Haselwood EL, Motter GG, 1966. Handbook of Hawaiian weeds. Hawaii, USA: Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Association, 479pp.
Hatfield AW, 1971. How to Enjoy your Weeds. New York, USA: Sterling Publishing Co., Inc., 106-111.
Heap IM, 2000. International survey of herbicide-resistant weeds (online). WWW page at http://www.weedscience.org/Resistance/resistmodule.asp.
Hewson RT, 1971. Studies on weed competition in some vegetable crops. PhD. Thesis. Uxbridge, UK: Brunel University.
Holm L, Doll J, Holm E, Pancho J, Herberger J, 1997. World Weeds. Natural Histories and Distribution. New York, USA: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Hooker JD, 1885. Flora of British India. Ist edn. Vol. IV. Kent, UK: L. Reeve & Company Limited.
Horsten PJFM, Kempenaar C, 1994. Spore production by the fungus Ascochyta caulina, a potential mycoherbicide against Chenopodium album. Rapport - DLO-Instituut voor Agrobiologisch en Bodemvruchtbaarheidsonderzoek Wageningen, Netherlands; DLO - Instituut voor Agrobiologisch en Bodemvruchtbaarheidsonderzoek, No. 23:46 pp.
Iffat Siddiqui, Rukhsana Bajwa, Arshad Javaid, 2009. A new foliar fungal pathogen, Alternaria alternata isolated from Chenopodium album in Pakistan., Pakistan Journal of Botany, 41(3):1437-1438 http://www.pakbs.org/pjbot/pjhtmls/contents.html
Indu Sikarwar, Dey, Y. N., Wanjari, M. M., Ajay Sharma, Gaidhani, S. N., Jadhav, A. D., 2017. Chenopodium album Linn. leaves prevent ethylene glycol-induced urolithiasis in rats., Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 195:275-282 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378874116319341
Isely D, 1960. Weed Identification and Control in the North Central States. Ames, Iowa, USA: Iowa State University Press.
Ivens GW, 1968. East African Weeds and their Control. Nairobi, Kenya: Oxford University Press.
Jansen PCM, 2004. Chenopodium album L., Grubben GJH, Denton OA, eds. Vegetables. Plant Resources of Tropical Africa (PROTA) 2:178-180 http://edepot.wur.nl/417517
Kempenaar C, 1995. Studies on biological control of Chenopodium album by Ascophyta caulina. Den Haag, Netherlands: CIP - Data Konninlijke Bibliotheek.
Kingsbury JM, 1964. Poisonous plants of the United States and Canada. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, USA: Prentice-Hall Inc.
Koblihova H, Frantik T, Kovar P, Dostalek J, Stejskalova H, 1987. Comparison of seasonal particle deposition in various plant stand. Rostlinna Vyroba, 33(1):17-26.
Korsmo E, Torstein V, Fykse H, 1981. Korsmos' Ugras Plansjer. Oslo, Norway: Norsk Landbruk/Landbruks Forlaget.
Kropff MJ, Spitters CJT, Schneiders BJ, Joenje W, Groot Wde, 1992. An eco-physiological model for interspecific competition, applied to the influence of Chenopodium album L. on sugarbeet. Weed Research (Oxford), 32(6):451-463
Kropff MJ, Weaver SE, Smits MA, 1992. Use of ecophysiological models for crop-weed interference: relations amongst weed density, relative time of weed emergence, relative leaf area, and yield loss. Weed Science, 40(2):296-301
Kubat A, Choroszewski P, Pawinska M, 1996. Potato and weed problems in Poland. In: Brown H, Cussans GW, Devine MD; Duke SO, Fernandez-Quintanilla C, Helweg A, Labrada RE, Landes M, Kudsk P, Streibig JCP, eds. Proceedings of the Second International Weed Control Congress, Copenhagen, Denmark. Slagelse, Denmark: Department of Weed Control and Pesticide Ecology, 1037-1039.
Lapointe A-M, Deschenes J-M, Gervais P, Lemieux C, 1984. Biology of fat hen (Chenopodium album): influence of soil cultivation on emergence and of population density on growth. Canadian Journal of Botany, 62(12):2587-2593
Lorenz RJ, Dewey SA, 1988. Noxious weeds that are poisonous. The ecology and economic impact of poisonous plants on livestock production [edited by James, L.F.; Ralphs, M.H. and Nielsen, D.B.] Boulder, CO 80301, USA; Westview Press, Inc., Frederick A. Prpger. Publishers, 309-336
Lorenzi H, 1982. Weeds of Brazil, terrestrial and aquatic, parasitic, poisonous and medicinal. (Plantas daninhas de Brasil, terrestres, aquaticas, parasitas, toxicas e medicinais.) Nova Odessa, Brazil: H. Lorenzi, 425 pp.
Lorenzi H, 1984. Manual de Identificacao e Controle de Plantas Danhinas. Odessa, Brazil: H. Lorenzi.
Maheshwari JK, 1963. The Flora of Delhi. New Delhi, India: CSIR.
Malik RK, Panwar RS, Bhan VM, 1984. Sensitivity of various wheat cultivars to 2, 4-D. Indian Journal of Weed Science, 16(3):197-199.
Malik RK, Tsedev D, 1996. Major Weeds of Mongolia. Rome, Italy: FAO Publications.
Mamarot J, Rodriguez A, 1997. Sensibilité des Mauvaises Herbes aux Herbicides. 4th edition. Paris, France: Association de Coordination Technique Agricole.
Mandák, B., Trávnícek, P., Paštová, L., Korínková, D., 2012. Is hybridization involved in the evolution of the Chenopodium album aggregate? An analysis based on chromosome counts and genome size estimation., Flora (Jena), 207(7):530-540 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03672530
Manko YP, Wesselovskyi IV, Gudz VP, 1996. An integrated system of weed control based on weed situation scouting. In: Brown H, Cussans GW, Devine MD; Duke SO, Fernandez-Quintanilla C, Helweg A, Labrada RE, Landes M, Kudsk P, Streibig JCP, eds. Proceedings of the Second International Weed Control Congress, Copenhagen, Denmark. Slagelse, Denmark: Department of Weed Control and Pesticide Ecology, 1027-1029.
Maurya AN, Ambasht RS, 1973. Significance of seed dimorphism in Alysicarpus monilifer DC. Journal of Ecology, 61:213-217.
Ngouajio M, Lemieux C, Leroux GD, 1999. Prediction of corn (Zea mays) yield loss from early observations of the relative leaf area and the relative leaf cover of weeds. Weed Science, 47(3):297-304; 27 ref.
Nielsen DB, Rimbey NR, James LF, 1988. Economic considerations of poisonous plants on livestock. In: James LF, Ralphs MH, Nielsen DB, eds. The Ecology and Economic Impact of Poisonous Plants on Livestock Production. Boulder, USA: Westview Press, 5-15.
Ohri D, 2015. The taxonomic riddle of Chenopodium album L complex (Amaranthaceae), The Nucleus , 58(2):131-134
Parks RJ, Curran WS, Roth GW, Hartwig NL, Calvin DD, 1995. Common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) control in corn (Zea mays) with postemergence herbicides and cultivation. Weed Technology, 9(4):728-735; 15 ref.
Partap T, Joshi BD, Galwey NW, 1998. Chenopods. Chenopodium spp. Promoting the conservation and use of underutilized and neglected crops :67 pp
Partap T, Kapoor P, 1985. The himalayan grain chenopods. I. Distribution and ethnobotany, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment , 14(3-4):185-199
Peachey, L. E., Pinchbeck, G. L., Matthews, J. B., Burden, F. A., Mulugeta, G., Scantlebury, C. E., Hodgkinson, J. E., 2015. An evidence-based approach to the evaluation of ethnoveterinary medicines against strongyle nematodes of equids., Veterinary Parasitology, 210(1/2):40-52 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03044017
Philp J, 1953. The weed problem in vegetable production. In: Proceedings of the 1st British Weed Control Conference. Farnham, UK: British Crop Protection Council, 18-23.
Prado Rde, Dominguez C, Tena M, 1989. Characterization of triazine-resistant biotypes of common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album), hairy fleabane (Conyza bonaeriensis), and yellow foxtail (Setaria glauca) found in Spain. Weed Science, 37(1):1-4; 17 ref.
Saghir AR, Markoullis G, 1974. Effects of weed competition and herbicides on yield and quality of potatoes. Proceedings 12th British Weed Control Conference. British Crop Protection Council. London UK, 533-539
Saldanha CJ, 1984. Flora of Karnataka. Magnoliaceae to Fabaceae. New Delhi, India: Oxford & IBH Publishing Co.
Saraswat VN, 1993. Major weeds of Indian agriculture - their distribution and ecology. Integrated weed management for sustainable agriculture. Proceedings of an Indian Society of Weed Science International Symposium, Hisar, India, 18-20 November 1993 Hisar, Haryana, India; Indian Society of Weed Science, Vol. I:35-41
Schmutz ER, Freeman BN, Reed RE, 1968. Livestock-Poisoning Plants of Arizona. Tucson, Arizona, USA: The University of Arizona Press.
Schratt-Ehrendorfer L, 2012. Occurrence of Chenopodium-taxa in Zillertal (Northern Tyrol, Austria). (Zu Vorkommen von Chenopodium-Sippen im Zillertal (Tirol, Österreich).) Verhandlungen der Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Österreich, 148/149:133-136.
Shobhana Ramteke, Sahu, B. L., Dahariya, N. S., Patel, K. S., Blazhev, B., Matini, L., 2016. Heavy metal contamination of vegetables., Journal of Environmental Protection, 7(7):996-1004 http://www.scirp.org/Journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=67111
Sidhu MK, 1991. Reproductive biology of weeds. In: Sidhu MK, ed. Biology of Punjab Weeds - Distribution and Evolutionary Status. Mohali, Punjab, India: Anova Publication.
Sivgami Srinivasan, Sabitha, A., 2012. Nutrient content of Chenopodium album (L.) as influenced by liquid biofertilizers, chemical fertilizers and vermicompost., Indian Journal of Nutrition and Dietetics, 49(4):143-149
Solymosi P, Lehoczki E, Laskay G, 1986. Difference in herbicide resistance to various taxonomic populations of common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) and late-flowering goosefoot (Chenopodium strictum) in Hungary. Weed Science, 34(2):175-180
Srivastava AK, 1967. Ecological studies of Chenopodium album L. Annals of Arid Zone, 6(2):212-214.
Stace C, 1997. New Flora of the British Isles. 2nd edition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Staniforth DW, Lovely WG, 1964. Losses due to annual weed infestations in soybeans in Iowa. North Central Weed Control Conference Research Report, 21:146.
Swanton CJ, Harker KN, Anderson RL, 1993. Crop losses due to weeds in Canada. Weed Technology, 7(2):537-542.
Tackholm V, 1974. Students' Flora of Egypt. 2nd edition. Cairo, Egypt: University of Cairo.
Toole EH, Brown E, 1946. Final results of the Duval buried seed experiment. Journal of Agricultural Research, 72:201-210.
Torner C, Sanchez del Arco MJ, Pardo A, Suso ML, Caudevilla ME, Zaragoza C, 1995. Growth of maize in competition with Chenopodium album L. and Datura stramonium L. Proceedings of the 1995 Congress of the Spanish Weed Science Society, Huesca, Spain, 14-16 November 1995., 323-328; 10 ref.
Torner C, Sanchez MJ, Pardo A, Suso ML, Caudevilla ME, Zaragoza C, 1996. Growth evolution of maize in competition with Chenopodium album and Datura stramonium. In: Brown H, Cussans GW, Devine MD; Duke SO, Fernandez-Quintanilla C, Helweg A, Labrada RE, Landes M, Kudsk P, Streibig JCP, eds. Proceedings of the Second International Weed Control Congress, Copenhagen, Denmark. Slagelse, Denmark: Department of Weed Control and Pesticide Ecology, 215-219.
USDA, 2017. National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/
USDA-ARS, 2017. US National Plant Germplasm System https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/search.aspx
Vanhala P, 1996. Response of weed population to flaming. In: Brown H, Cussans GW, Devine MD; Duke SO, Fernandez-Quintanilla C, Helweg A, Labrada RE, Landes M, Kudsk P, Streibig JCP, eds. Proceedings of the Second International Weed Control Congress, Copenhagen, Denmark. Slagelse, Denmark: Department of Weed Control and Pesticide Ecology, 1115-1120.
Villalba, M., Barderas, R., Mas, S., Colás, C., Batanero, E., Rodríguez, R., 2014. Amaranthaceae pollens: review of an emerging allergy in the Mediterranean area., Journal of Investigational Allergology and Clinical Immunology, 24(6):371-381 http://www.jiaci.org
Vít, P., Krak, K., Trávnícek, P., Douda, J., Lomonosova, M. N., Mandák, B., 2016. Genome size stability across Eurasian Chenopodium species (Amaranthaceae)., Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 182(3):637-649 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1095-8339
Wang ZR, 1990. Farmland Weeds in China. Beijing, China: Agricultural Publishing House.
Watt JM, Breyer-Brandwijk MG, 1962. The Medicinal and Poisonous Plants of Southern and Eastern Africa. Edinburgh and London, UK: E & S Livingstone Ltd.
Wells MJ, Balsinhas AA, Joffe H, Engelbrecht VM, Harding G, Stirton CH, 1986. A catalogue of problem plants in South Africa. Memoirs of the botanical survey of South Africa No 53. Pretoria, South Africa: Botanical Research Institute.
Williams JT, 1963. Biological flora of British Isles: Chenopodium album L. Journal of Ecology, 51:711-725.
Williams JT, 1964. A study of competing ability of Chenopodium album L. Weed Research, 4:283-295.
Williams JT, 1965. A study of the competitive ability of Chenopodium album L. I. Interference between kale and Chenopodium album grown in pure stands and mixtures. Weed Research, 5:283-295.
Wodehouse RP, 1971. Hayfever Plants. New York, USA: Hafner Publishing Company.
Wright RH, 1972. What Good is a Weed? Ecology in Action. New York, USA: Lothrop, Lee and Shep.
Yuan JunWen, Gu LiLi, Chen ShaSha, Xu DongSheng, Lan HaiYan, 2010. Cloning of betaine aldehyde dehydrogenase gene (CaBADH) from Chenopodium album L. and expression analysis of salt stress and construction of plant expression vector., Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 47(7):1273-1279
Zhang HengQing, Fang XiaoDi, Wu JinMei, Du Yang, Tan Kun, Fan QiangJun, Zhu EnWei, 2012. Analysis on genetic diversity of Chenopodium album L. populations in four natural islands of south of Changdao, Shandong Province by ISSR., Bulletin of Botanical Research, 32(5):632-635 http://bbr.nefu.edu.cn
Distribution MapsTop of page
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/