Ambrosia artemisiifolia (common ragweed)
Index
- Pictures
- Identity
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Description
- Plant Type
- Distribution
- Distribution Table
- History of Introduction and Spread
- Introductions
- Risk of Introduction
- Habitat
- Habitat List
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
- Growth Stages
- Biology and Ecology
- Climate
- Latitude/Altitude Ranges
- Soil Tolerances
- Natural enemies
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Pathway Causes
- Pathway Vectors
- Plant Trade
- Impact Summary
- Economic Impact
- Environmental Impact
- Social Impact
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Uses
- Uses List
- Detection and Inspection
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- Gaps in Knowledge/Research Needs
- References
- Links to Websites
- Contributors
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.
Generate reportPictures
Top of pageIdentity
Top of pagePreferred Scientific Name
- Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.
Preferred Common Name
- common ragweed
Other Scientific Names
- Ambrosia artemisiifolia f. artemisiifolia
- Ambrosia artemisiifolia subsp. artemisiifolia
- Ambrosia artemisiifolia var. artemisiifolia
- Ambrosia artemisiifolia var. elatior (L.) Descourt.
- Ambrosia chilensis Hook. & Arn.
- Ambrosia elata Salisb.
- Ambrosia elatior L.
- Ambrosia elatior var. elatior
- Ambrosia glandulosa Scheele
- Ambrosia monophylla Rydb.
- Ambrosia paniculata f. paniculata
- Ambrosia paniculata var. paniculata
- Iva monophylla Walter
International Common Names
- English: annual ragweed; bitterweed; blackweed; carrot weed; hayfever weed; hayweed; hogweed; low ragweed; Roman wormwood; short ragweed; small ragweed; stammerwort; wild tansy
- Spanish: altamisa; amargosa; ambrosia de hojas de ajenjo; artemisia de terra; estafiate
- French: absinthe du Canada; ambrosie a feuilles d'armoise; l'ambroisie; petite herbe á poux
- Chinese: tun cao
- Portuguese: ambrosia-americana
Local Common Names
- Brazil: cravorana; losna-selvagem
- Czech Republic: ambrozie perenolistá
- Denmark: bynke-ambrosie
- Estonia: pujulehine ambroosia
- Finland: marunatuoksukki
- Germany: Beifussblaettrige Ambrosie; Beifussblaettriges Traubenkraut; römischer Wermut
- Hungary: parlagfu
- Italy: ambrosia con foglie di artemisia
- Japan: butakusa; buta-kusa
- Latvia: vermellapu ambrozija
- Lithuania: kietine ambrozija
- Netherlands: alsemambrosia
- Poland: ambrozja bylicowata
- Portugal: losna-do-campo
- Russian Federation: ambrosia polinnolistnaja
- Slovakia: ambrózia palinolistá
- Sweden: malörtsambrosia
- Turkey: arsiz zaylan
EPPO code
- AMBEL (Ambrosia artemisiifolia)
Summary of Invasiveness
Top of pageA. artemisiifolia is an annual herb native to Central and Northern America. It has been accidentally introduced into a large number of countries as a contaminant of seed and grains. A. artemisiifolia typically colonises disturbed land where it produces a large number of seeds which can remain viable in the soil for 40 years or more. The pollen produced by species of Ambrosia is highly allergenic and can induce allergic rhinitis, fever, or dermatitis. As a result, high medical costs have been reported in areas with large infestations in both its native and introduced range. A. artemisiifolia can also invade agricultural land where it acts as a weed in a number of crops (in particular in sunflower, maize, soybean and cereals) and can cause significant decreases in yields.
Taxonomic Tree
Top of page- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Plantae
- Phylum: Spermatophyta
- Subphylum: Angiospermae
- Class: Dicotyledonae
- Order: Asterales
- Family: Asteraceae
- Genus: Ambrosia
- Species: Ambrosia artemisiifolia
Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Top of pageA. artemisiifolia was described by Linnaeus (1753: 988) as one of the four listed Ambrosia species (the other three species are: A. trifida L., A. elatior L., and A. maritima L.). The lectotype was designated by Hind et al. (1993) on a specimen preserved at LINN (The Linnean Society, 2016).
The name Ambrosia means food of the gods (Spencer, 1957). Pigs and sheep will consume A. artemisiifolia, thus the common name hogweed (Crockett, 1977).
Description
Top of pageAnnual herb (therophyte), (10-)20-60(-150) cm tall. Stems erect. Leaves opposite (proximal) and alternate, with blades lanceolate or elliptic [(20-)25-55(-90) × 20-30(-50) mm], 1-2-pinnately lobed, sparsely pubescent abaxially, glandular-dotted on both faces, petioled [petiole 25-35(-60) mm long]. Flowers arranged in capitula, the male capitula (5-20 flowers per capitulum, the involucre being cup-shaped, glabrous to pubescent) forming a terminal spike-like inflorescence, the female capitula proximal to the male ones. Fruit globose to pyriform, 2-3 mm long, more or less pubescent.
Distribution
Top of pageA. artemisiifolia is native to North and Central America (Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987; Kovalev, 1989). It is now widely distributed across the world; Africa (CJB, 2016), Asia (Flora of China Editorial Committee, 2011), Australia (Council of Heads of Australasian Herbaria, 2016) and Europe (Euro+Med, 2016).
A. artemisiifolia has become a dominant alien plant in countries such as Italy (Siniscalo and Barni, 1994), Lithuania (Gudzinskas, 1993) and Hungary. A. artemisiifolia is not as prominent in subtropical and tropical regions (Allard, 1943; King, 1966). The hot, dry summers in southern Europe and Mediterranean areas are not favourable for its growth (Allard, 1943; King, 1966). In addition to this A. artemisiifolia is relatively rare in northern Europe (Norway, Sweden, Scotland and Ireland) (Gerber et al., 2011).
Distribution Table
Top of pageThe 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.
History of Introduction and Spread
Top of pageA. artemisiifolia is a neophyte which was introduced in Africa, Europe and Asia after the year 1492 (the discovery of America). Some studies on the history of introduction were published for Europe, in various regions such as France (Chauvel et al., 2006), Austria (Essl et al., 2009) and central and eastern Europe. A. artemisiifolia was reported in Germany in 1863 (Bassett and Crompton, 1975; Kovalev, 1989). A. artemisiifoliais found almost throughout Hungary although it has not been recorded in northern regions because climatic conditions prevent the seeds from ripening (Beres, 1994). In Russia, A. artemisiifolia was collected for the first time near Stavropol in 1918. It was also found in the Krasnodar region (Vasiliev, 1958). The distribution of the weed has rapidly increased; in 1950 it infested 200,000 ha in the Krasnodar region (Makodzeba, 1955); in 1950-1955 it occurred in the Rostov region (Bezruchenko and Chukarin, 1956); in 1963 it was found in the Primorski region (Voroshilov, 1966); and in 1973 in the Khabarovsk region (Nechaev and Nechaev, 1973). A. artemisiifolia has been spreading in Russia for more than 80 years, affecting more than 5 million ha and without the phytosanitary measures that have limited its distribution, could potentially occupy all areas of the country (Moskalenko, 2001). A. artemisiifolia was collected in 1995 from north-east Anatolia, Turkey, where well-established populations of the weed now exist (Byfield and Baytop, 1998).
No comprehensive studies about the history of introduction appear to be available for Asia and Africa however Ling et al. (2012) stated that this species was introduced into China in 1930.
A. artemisiifolia was first recorded in Australia in 1908 (Julien et al., 2012).
Introductions
Top of pageIntroduced to | Introduced from | Year | Reason | Introduced by | Established in wild through | References | Notes | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural reproduction | Continuous restocking | |||||||
Australia | 1908 | Yes | Julien et al. (2012) | |||||
Austria | North America | 1883 | Yes | Essl et al. (2009) | ||||
China | 1930 | Yes | Ling et al. (2012) | |||||
France | North America | 1863 | Yes | Chauvel et al. (2006) | ||||
Germany | North America | 1863 | Yes | Chauvel and Martinez (2012) | ||||
Italy | North America | 1902 | Yes | Gentili et al. (2016) | ||||
Netherlands | North America | 1860 | Yes | Chauvel and Martinez (2012) | ||||
Russian Federation | North America | 1918 | Yes | Reznik (2009) | ||||
UK | North America | 1895 | Yes | Chauvel and Martinez (2012) |
Risk of Introduction
Top of pageIt is possible that A. artemisiifolia will spread further as it is accidentally introduced as a contaminant of seed and grain into other countries. Temperature is the main factor limiting the spread of A. artemisiifolia; under cooler conditions plants fail to produce flowers or seeds fail to ripen (Bullock et al., 2010). It is possible that as a result of climate change, A. artemisiifolia may increase its distribution.
Habitat
Top of pageA. artemisiifolia is typically found on disturbed sites such as, railways, wasteland, uncultivated and cultivated land (field crops, orchards, vineyards, nurseries) and constructions sites. It is naturally found along river banks but may also be found in grasslands and dry meadows.
Habitat List
Top of pageCategory | Sub-Category | Habitat | Presence | Status |
---|---|---|---|---|
Terrestrial | ||||
Terrestrial – Managed | Cultivated / agricultural land | Secondary/tolerated habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | |
Protected agriculture (e.g. glasshouse production) | Secondary/tolerated habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | ||
Managed forests, plantations and orchards | Secondary/tolerated habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | ||
Managed grasslands (grazing systems) | Secondary/tolerated habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | ||
Disturbed areas | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | ||
Disturbed areas | Principal habitat | Natural | ||
Rail / roadsides | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | ||
Rail / roadsides | Principal habitat | Natural | ||
Urban / peri-urban areas | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | ||
Urban / peri-urban areas | Principal habitat | Natural | ||
Buildings | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | ||
Buildings | Principal habitat | Natural | ||
Terrestrial ‑ Natural / Semi-natural | Riverbanks | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | |
Riverbanks | Principal habitat | Natural | ||
Freshwater | ||||
Rivers / streams | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | ||
Rivers / streams | Principal habitat | Natural |
Hosts/Species Affected
Top of pageExperiments carried out by Vidotto et al. (2013) showed that A. artemisiifolia inhibits the germination and growth of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) by more than 50%. The same authors showed also a reduction in growth for lettuce (Brassica spp.). In corn, season-long interference from dense populations of A. artemisiifolia in Illinois was found to reduce yields by 74% in two years. A. artemisiifolia also has an impact on the growth of peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) and was ranked as one of the worst weeds to control during cultivation (Wilcut and Swann, 1990; Clewis et al., 2002).
Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
Top of pagePlant name | Family | Context |
---|---|---|
Allium cepa (onion) | Liliaceae | Other |
Arachis hypogaea (groundnut) | Fabaceae | Main |
Beta vulgaris (beetroot) | Chenopodiaceae | Main |
Capsicum annuum (bell pepper) | Solanaceae | Other |
Capsicum frutescens (chilli) | Solanaceae | Other |
Daucus carota (carrot) | Apiaceae | Main |
Glycine max (soyabean) | Fabaceae | Main |
Helianthus annuus (sunflower) | Asteraceae | Main |
Helianthus tuberosus (Jerusalem artichoke) | Asteraceae | Main |
Ipomoea batatas (sweet potato) | Convolvulaceae | Main |
Manihot esculenta (cassava) | Euphorbiaceae | Main |
Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco) | Solanaceae | Other |
Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean) | Fabaceae | Main |
Pinus taeda (loblolly pine) | Pinaceae | Other |
Populus (poplars) | Salicaceae | Other |
Raphanus sativus (radish) | Brassicaceae | Main |
Solanum lycopersicum (tomato) | Solanaceae | Other |
Solanum tuberosum (potato) | Solanaceae | Main |
Sorghum bicolor (sorghum) | Poaceae | Main |
Triticum aestivum (wheat) | Poaceae | Main |
Zea mays (maize) | Poaceae | Main |
Growth Stages
Top of page Flowering stage, Fruiting stageBiology and Ecology
Top of pageGenetics
A. artemisiifolia is a diploid taxon with 2n = 36 (CCDB, 2016). Hybrids were described with A. psilostachya (A. × integradiensis W.H.Wagner) and A. trifida L. (A. × helenae Rouleau) (Strother, 2006).
Reproductive Biology
A. artemisiifolia is a fast growing herb which can completes its growth cycle in 115 to 183 days (Bassett and Crompton, 1975; Li et al., 1989; Beres, 1994), with each plant producing a high number of viable seeds which are small in size and low in weight (Yurukova-Grancharova et al., 2015). Pollination is performed by wind, the pollen being small (20-30 µm), tricolporate, sphaerical, with short and sparse spines andcavae (Payne et al., 1970; Bassett et al., 1978).
Physiology and Phenology
A. artemisiifolia uses the C3 pathway of photosynthesis. It is one of the earliest emerging summer annual weed species and may germinate once soil temperatures reach 11-13°C (Forcella et al., 1997). It is a pioneer annual in temperate regions, and rapidly succeeds in the first year of old fields from buried seed (Ohtsuka, 1998). In the autumn, ploughing generally favours establishment of this weed (Altieri and Liebman, 1988).
Photoperiod and temperature are the main factors affecting growth and development of A. artemisiifolia (King, 1966; Deen et al., 1998). Flowering starts approximately 119 days after germination (Li et al., 1989). Long days favour the development of male flowers, whereas female flowers are favoured by shortened days (King, 1966). Increasing of atmospheric CO2 in urban areas resulted in increased pollen production by A. artemisiifolia according to Ziska et al. (2003). Feher et al. (1998) reported that high daily temperatures and great variations of diurnal temperatures promoted pollination, whereas rain, clouds and humid weather reduced pollination. Typically, peak pollen production often occurs from mid-August to mid-September (Albasser, 1992).
Anthers open with a rise in temperature and low relative humidity (King, 1966). The adaptability of the plant to cooler climates in Hungary has been demonstrated by shortening the time from germination to flowering and seed ripening (Beres, 1994). A study carried out in the USA, using plants originating from Indiana, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin, suggested the existence of common ragweed ecotypes based on origin of the seeds (Leif et al., 2000).
Flowering occurs from July to October in both the origin and non-native ranges. Seeds have a low rate of germination at maturity (Sahoo, 1998) and usually require winter stratification before germination; however, seeds may undergo secondary dormancy (Altieri and Liebman, 1988). The burial of seeds increases the non-dormant seed population of A. artemisiifolia by 0.5 to 7.1% (Sahoo, 1998).
One plant may produce 3,000-4,000 seeds (Beres, 1994; Beres et al., 2002). However, up to 32,000 seeds have been counted in a single plant (Bassett and Crompton, 1975). Seed production by A. artemisiifolia may be reduced over 80% depending on its emergence relative to the crop growth stage (Chikoye et al., 1995).
A. artemisiifolia seeds may survive up to 40 years (King, 1966). Germination of seeds is decreased when stored in cattle slurry and was significantly influenced by the time of storage in maize silage. Seeds stopped germinating after 3-5 months in cattle slurry (following storage in maize silage) or after storage in maize silage for 13 months (Lesnik, 2001).
A. artemisiifolia contains phenolic compounds and terpenes (Beres et al., 2002). The allelopathic influences of A. artemisiifolia were tested in bioassays on soyabean, black gram, rice and maize. Aqueous extracts of dried fresh leaves of the weed significantly suppressed the germination, plumule and radicle length of all crops tested. Toxicity increased with the increase in concentration of extracts. The effect of the extracts was greater on the germination of black gram and rice compared to soyabean and maize. A chloroform extract from A. artemisiifolia inhibited the growth and decreased the chlorophyll a concentrations of two green algae (Chlorella vulgaris and Chlamydomonas sp.) (Bruckner et al., 2001).
Environmental Requirements
A. artemisiifolia is susceptible to frost and is commonly found between 30-50° at both north and south latitudes in diverse settings (King, 1966). It rarely grows above altitudes of 1000 m (Allard, 1943). It can grow in clay or sandy soils, but grows well on wet, heavy soils at pH 6.0-7.0 (Bassett and Crompton, 1975).
Climate
Top of pageClimate | Status | Description | Remark |
---|---|---|---|
Aw - Tropical wet and dry savanna climate | Preferred | < 60mm precipitation driest month (in winter) and < (100 - [total annual precipitation{mm}/25]) | |
BS - Steppe climate | Preferred | > 430mm and < 860mm annual precipitation | |
BW - Desert climate | Preferred | < 430mm annual precipitation | |
Cf - Warm temperate climate, wet all year | Preferred | Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, wet all year | |
Cs - Warm temperate climate with dry summer | Preferred | Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry summers | |
Df - Continental climate, wet all year | Preferred | Continental climate, wet all year (Warm average temp. > 10°C, coldest month < 0°C, wet all year) |
Latitude/Altitude Ranges
Top of pageLatitude North (°N) | Latitude South (°S) | Altitude Lower (m) | Altitude Upper (m) |
---|---|---|---|
60-65 | 50-55 |
Soil Tolerances
Top of pageSoil drainage
- free
- impeded
- seasonally waterlogged
Soil reaction
- acid
- neutral
- very acid
Soil texture
- heavy
- light
- medium
Special soil tolerances
- infertile
- saline
- shallow
Natural enemies
Top of pageNatural enemy | Type | Life stages | Specificity | References | Biological control in | Biological control on |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bemisia tabaci | Herbivore | Leaves | not specific | |||
Candidatus Phytoplasma solani | Pathogen | Leaves | ||||
Entyloma compositarum | Pathogen | Leaves | not specific | |||
Entyloma polysporum | Pathogen | Leaves | not specific | |||
Epiblema strenuana | Herbivore | Leaves | not specific | |||
Harpalus pensylvanicus | Herbivore | Seeds | not specific | |||
Hyalesthes obsoletus | Herbivore | |||||
Liriomyza trifolii | Herbivore | Leaves/Stems | not specific | |||
Macrophomina phaseolina | Pathogen | Roots | not specific | |||
Nemorimyza maculosa | Pathogen | Leaves | not specific | |||
Ophraella communa | Herbivore | Introduced into Japan and Taiwan | ||||
Phyllachora ambrosiae | Pathogen | |||||
Plasmopara halstedii | Pathogen | Inflorescence/Leaves | not specific | |||
Ponometia candefacta | Herbivore | Leaves | not specific | |||
Protomyces gravidus | Pathogen | Stems | not specific | |||
Pseudomonas syringae pv. tagetis | Pathogen | |||||
Puccinia conoclinii | Pathogen | Leaves | not specific | |||
Puccinia xanthii | Pathogen | Leaves | not specific | |||
Pustula tragopogonis | Pathogen | Leaves | not specific | |||
Septoria epambrosiae | Pathogen | |||||
Sphaeraspis vitis | Herbivore | not specific | ||||
Tarachidia candefacta | Herbivore | Introduced into Russia | ||||
Thanatephorus cucumeris | Pathogen | Leaves/Roots | not specific | |||
Verticillium dahliae | Pathogen | Leaves | not specific | |||
Zygogramma suturalis | Herbivore | Leaves/Seedlings | Introduced into Russia, former Yugoslavia, Croatia and China |
Notes on Natural Enemies
Top of pageSeveral natural enemies have been recorded from A. artemisiifolia as this species has been the focus of numerous biological control programmes. Maceljski and Igrc (1990) reported 28 insects including five Orthoptera, three Heteroptera, four Homoptera, six Coleoptera and nine Lepidoptera that fed on A. artemisiifolia. However, several of these insects are common crop pests. According to Julien et al. (2012) more than 70 arthropods have been recorded from A. artemisiifolia in its native range and a total of 20 pathogens identified from Eurasia including Puccinia xanthii (Gerber et al., 2011).
A. artemisiifolia may also serve as an alternative host for crop diseases such as Meloidogyne arenaria race 2 (Tedford and Fortnum, 1988), M. incognita race 3 (Tedford and Fortnum, 1988), Erysiphe cichoracearum (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Albugo tragopogonis (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Plasmopara halstedii (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Entyloma compositarum (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Entyloma polysporum (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Puccinia xanthii (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Aster yellow virus (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Cucumber mosaic virus (Kazinczi et al., 2001), Cuscuta gronovii (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Protomyces gravidus (Cartwright and Templeton, 1988), Septoria sp. (Bohár and Schwarczinger, 1999), Phoma sp. (Briere et al., 1995) and Sclerotinia sclerotiorum of sunflower (Bohár and Kiss, 1999).
Means of Movement and Dispersal
Top of pageNatural Dispersal
The fruits of A. artemisiifolia are spread by wind and water. The seeds can remain on the surface of water for two hours or more (Moskalenko, 2001) and can be dispersed in the spring by water in ditches, canals and rivers.
Vector Transmission
The seeds of A. artemisiifolia may be carried to new locations by birds.
Accidental Introduction
Seeds of A. artemisiifolia can be spread from field to field by agricultural practices (Moskalenko, 2001). Seeds are also commonly found in stored and transported grains (Ilic and Kalinovic, 1995; Jehlik, 1995; Moskalenko, 2001). The movement of A. artemisiifolia has linked to the transport of cereals and oil crops (Jehlik, 1995; Semenenko, 2002). In Norway, seeds of A. artemisiifolia have been accidentally imported as a contaminant of bird seed (Jorgensen, 2002).
Pathway Causes
Top of pageCause | Notes | Long Distance | Local | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Disturbance | Yes | |||
Flooding and other natural disasters | Yes | |||
Medicinal use | Yes | Yes | ||
Research | Yes | Yes | ||
Seed trade | Yes | Yes | ||
Self-propelled | Yes | Yes |
Pathway Vectors
Top of pageVector | Notes | Long Distance | Local | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Aircraft | Yes | |||
Host and vector organisms | Yes | |||
Land vehicles | Railway freight, dock cargo, agricultural vehicles | Yes | ||
Soil, sand and gravel | Soil, sand | Yes | Yes | |
Wind | Yes |
Plant Trade
Top of pagePlant parts liable to carry the pest in trade/transport | Pest stages | Borne internally | Borne externally | Visibility of pest or symptoms |
---|---|---|---|---|
True seeds (inc. grain) | seeds | Yes | Pest or symptoms usually visible to the naked eye |
Plant parts not known to carry the pest in trade/transport |
---|
Bark |
Bulbs/Tubers/Corms/Rhizomes |
Flowers/Inflorescences/Cones/Calyx |
Fruits (inc. pods) |
Growing medium accompanying plants |
Leaves |
Roots |
Seedlings/Micropropagated plants |
Stems (above ground)/Shoots/Trunks/Branches |
Wood |
Impact Summary
Top of pageCategory | Impact |
---|---|
Animal/plant collections | None |
Animal/plant products | Negative |
Biodiversity (generally) | Negative |
Crop production | Negative |
Economic/livelihood | Negative |
Environment (generally) | Negative |
Fisheries / aquaculture | None |
Forestry production | None |
Human health | Negative |
Livestock production | Negative |
Native fauna | None |
Native flora | Negative |
Rare/protected species | None |
Tourism | Negative |
Trade/international relations | Negative |
Transport/travel | None |
Economic Impact
Top of pageA. artemisiifolia can have a negative economic impact on agriculture by decreasing crop yields, crop quality and efficiency of propagation and harvest. There is published data for losses of income in the USA (Loux and Berry, 1991), France (Bertrand and Maupas, 1996), Hungary (Toth et al., 1989) and Germany (Reinhardt et al., 2003). In Germany costs related to the invasion of A. artemisiifolia were estimated of about €32 million (Reinhardt et al., 2003).
In Hungary, A. artemisiifolia at a density of 26 plants per m² in Zea mays (maize) gave yield loss of 69-73% (Varga et al., 2000; Varga et al., 2002). In Phaseolus vulgaris, grain yield may be reduced by 10-22% when A. artemisiifolia emerges with the crop (Chikoye et al., 1995) and 30-75% lost when A. artemisifolia was present from flowering to harvest (Evanylo and Zehnder, 1989). A study by Coble et al. (1981) found that four A. artemisiifolia plants per 10 m of row reduced yields of Glycine max by 8%. Yield was not reduced if A. artemisiifolia competed with G. max less than six weeks after emergence (Coble et al., 1981). One A. artemisiifolia plant per 3 m of row reduced cotton (species of Gossypium) yields by 5-12% (Byrd and Coble, 1991). Plot experiments in Hungary also found that A. artemisiifolia decreased root yield of Beta vulgaris by 40-50% and that the sugar content was reduced by 13-15% (Bosak and Mod, 2000).
A. artemisiifolia may also serve as an alternative host for a number of crop diseases. As a result, these may decrease crop yields and would increase costs required for control of such diseases. Examples of these diseases include Meloidogyne arenaria race 2 (Tedford and Fortnum, 1988), M. incognita race 3 (Tedford and Fortnum, 1988), Erysiphe cichoracearum (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Albugo tragopogonis (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Plasmopara halstedii (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Entyloma compositarum (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Entyloma polysporum (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Puccinia xanthii (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Aster yellow virus (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Cucumber mosaic virus (Kazinczi et al., 2001), Cuscuta gronovii (Bassett and Crompton, 1975), Protomyces gravidus (Cartwright and Templeton, 1988), Septoria sp. (Bohár and Schwarczinger, 1999), Phoma sp. (Briere et al., 1995) and Sclerotinia sclerotiorum of sunflower (Bohár and Kiss, 1999). In addition, the allopathic effects of A. artemisiifolia on reduced crop germination and growth have been reported (Beres et al., 1998; Bruckner, 1998).
Environmental Impact
Top of pageIn introduced areas, A. artemisiifolia can acts as a pioneer species. As a result A. artemisiifolia competes with native plants species for space, nutrients, light and water (Beres et al., 2002) and may result in changes to habitats and a decrease in biodiversity.
Social Impact
Top of pageDue to the morphological characteristics of the pollen, A. artemisiifolia is one of the most common seasonal sources of aeroallergens which cause allergic rhinitis, fever, or dermatitis (Déchamp, 1999; Moller et al., 2002).
Increasing atmospheric CO2 in urban areas was found to result in an increase in pollen production (Ziska et al., 2003); a doubling of the atmospheric CO2 concentration stimulated ragweed pollen production by 61% (Wayne et al., 2002). This, combined with an increase in distribution, has resulted in a significant increase in the number of patients in Europe diagnosed with allergic diseases over the past 10-20 years (Farkas et al. 1998). A study by Cakmak et al. (2002) found that an increase of 72 plants-grains per m³ was associated with an increase of about 10% in patient visits to a children's hospital in eastern Ontario for conjunctivitis and rhinitis. It is assumed that native workers, who have been living with the pollen for a long time (i.e. exposed to natural immunotherapy), have developed a natural tolerance to it (Dervaderics et al., 2002). A. artemisiifolia also caused allergenic hay fever in its native range, in particular in Canada and northern USA (Gerber et al., 2011).
In addition to this, cattle may eat A. artemisiifolia after grasses have been exhausted, which may cause nausea and also changes the flavour of the milk producing an undesirable product (Spencer, 1957).
Risk and Impact Factors
Top of page Invasiveness- Proved invasive outside its native range
- Has a broad native range
- Abundant in its native range
- Highly adaptable to different environments
- Is a habitat generalist
- Tolerates, or benefits from, cultivation, browsing pressure, mutilation, fire etc
- Pioneering in disturbed areas
- Tolerant of shade
- Capable of securing and ingesting a wide range of food
- Highly mobile locally
- Fast growing
- Has high reproductive potential
- Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
- Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
- Increases vulnerability to invasions
- Negatively impacts agriculture
- Negatively impacts forestry
- Negatively impacts human health
- Negatively impacts animal health
- Reduced native biodiversity
- Threat to/ loss of native species
- Causes allergic responses
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Competition - shading
- Pest and disease transmission
- Herbivory/grazing/browsing
- Hybridization
- Induces hypersensitivity
- Interaction with other invasive species
- Rapid growth
- Highly likely to be transported internationally accidentally
- Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
- Difficult/costly to control
Uses
Top of pageEconomic Value
A. artemisiifolia may be used as food for pigs and sheep (Crockett, 1977). Cattle may also eat A. artemisiifolia but they may suffer nausea (Stubbendieck et al., 1995).
Social Benefit
A. artemisiifolia has been used as both an anti-inflammatory agent (Stubbendieck et al., 1995); and an antibacterial agent (Kim et al., 1993).
Environmental Services
A. artemisiifolia can be used for phytoremediation in soils contaminated with heavy metals (Bassett and Crompton, 1975; Kang et al., 1998) and is able to successfully remove soil lead (Pb) and cadmium (Cd) during repeated croppings (Pichtel et al., 2000).
The fruits of A. artemisiifolia are also often consumed by small birds and animals (Stubbendieck et al., 1995).
Uses List
Top of pageEnvironmental
- Soil improvement
Materials
- Chemicals
Medicinal, pharmaceutical
- Source of medicine/pharmaceutical
- Traditional/folklore
Detection and Inspection
Top of pageAuda et al. (2002) and Danner et al. (2012) showed that it may soon be possible to detect dense populations of A. artemisiifolia using spatial remote sensing methods.
Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
Top of pageA. artemisiifolia is similar in appearance to a number of species in the genus Ambrosia.
For example, it is similar to A. acanthicarpa from which differs by the narrower capitula (2-3 vs. 3-7 mm), the shape and lenght of fruits (globose to pyriform, 2-3 mm long vs. more or less fusiform, 3-5 mm long), number and lenght of spines in the fruits (3-5 spines each 0.1-0.5 mm long vs. 8-18 spines each 8-18 mm long) (Strother, 2006).
Another similar species is A. annua which is mainly different by its inflorescence with capitula arranged in panicles.
A. trifida grows taller, has larger seed and has palmate leaves divided into three lobes compared with A. artemisiifolia.
A. bidentata has hairy, notched leaves that clasp the stem. Seed are angled with prominent spines.
A. psilostachya is a perennial with leaves not as finely divided as A. artemisiifolia.
Prevention and Control
Top of pageControl
Cultural Control
Planting red clover (Trifolium pretense) as a cover crop in established winter wheat reduced the biomass of A. artemisiifolia (Mutch et al., 2003).
Mechanical Control
A. artemisiifolia may be controlled by hand weeding, mowing (at 2 cm, from the soil) and by crushing with a roadroller (Vincent et al., 1992). Hand weeding is the most effective in reducing pollen and seed production although it is also the most expensive (Vincent et al., 1992). Mechanical cutting can reduce A. artemisiifolia seed production by up to 74% depending on the number and timing of cuttings (Guan et al., 1991).
Biological Control
A. artemisiifolia has been the subject of a biocontrol programme which has resulted in the release of a number of agents.
Zygogramma suturalis (ambrosia striped leaf beetle) has a preferential appetite for A. artemisiifolia (Igrc and Ilovai, 1996). The beetle may consume 50-70% of the leaf surface area (Kuznetsov et al., 1987). Z. suturalis was introduced from North America into several countries including Russia in 1978 (Reznik et al., 1994), former Yugoslavia in 1984 (Igrc, 1987) and Croatia in 1985 (Igrc et al., 1995). Z. suturalis was introduced from Canada and Russia to China in 1997 (Wan and Wang, 1989) and 1988 (Wan and Wang, 1990). However, 10 years after it was introduced into Russia it was only moderately successful due to low population establishment (Reznik et al., 1994) and poor movement (Reznik et al., 1990).
A. artemisiifolia is a known host for Ophraella communa (ragweed leaf beetle) (Knowles et al., 1999). O. communa was introduced into Japan in 1996 (Moriya, 1999; Yamazaki et al., 2000; Moriya and Shiyake, 2001; Moriya et al., 2002) and Taiwan (Wang and Chiang, 1998). Tarachidia candefacta was introduced into Russia from Canada in 1967 and became established (Shurov, 1998).
Potential biological control agents such as Epiblema strenuana (Wan, 1991), Pseudomonas syringae pv. tagetis (Johnson et al., 1996), Protomyces gravidus (Cartwright and Templeton, 1988) Phyllachora ambrosiae (Vajna et al., 2000) and Septoria epambrosiae (Bohár and Schwarczinger, 1999; Becker, 2001; Farr and Castlebury, 2001) have been pursued and the possibility of biological control of A. artemisiifolia is still being considered.
In the autumn of 2001, an epidemic of downy mildew (Plasmopara halstedii) occurred on A. artemisiifolia over large areas of central Hungary (Vajna, 2002).
The herbicidal effect of essential oils (1%, v/v) from red thyme (Thymus vulgaris L.), summer savory (Satureja hortensis L.), cinnamon (Cinnamomum zeylanicum Blume) and clove [Syzygium aromaticum (L.) Merr. & L.M.Perry] on shoots of A. artemisiifolia was determined in laboratory and greenhouse experiments (Tworkoski, 2002). The oils may be useful as natural product herbicides for organic farming systems.
Sesquiterpenoid lactones extracted from A. taurica were highly toxic against the seeds of A. artemisiifolia (C50 10.4-56.8 mg/litre) (Konovalov et al., 2002).
Chemical Control
A number of post- and pre-emergence chemicals have been used to control A. artemisiifolia with varied success.
Pre-emergence application of mesotrione controlled A. artemisiifolia by at least 80%, whereas post-emergence provided control from 56-97% (Armel et al., 2003).
Diphenyl ether herbicides (lactofen, fomesafen and acifluorfen) (Holowid and Smith, 1986; Monks et al., 1993; Zhan et al., 1993; Lee et al., 1995; Nelson and Renner, 1998), cloransulam-methyl (Nelson and Renner, 1998, Askew et al., 1999) and chlorimuron (Moseley and Hagood, 1991, Monks et al., 1993, Prostko and Meade, 1993) have been used for post-emergence control of A. artemisiifolia in soybean. Pre-emergence use of flumioxazin and chlorimuron plus metribuzin controlled A. artemisiifolia in no-till soybean (Niekamp et al., 1999; Niekamp and Johnson, 2001) whereas glufosinate alone controlled A. artemisiifolia in glufosinate-resistant soybean by more than 85% (Beyers et al., 2002).
In maize, Isoxaflutole (Luscombe and Pallett, 1996; Sprague et al., 1999), atrazine (Culpepper and York, 1999), diflufenzopyr plus dicamba (Sikkema et al., 1999), atrazine plus bromoxynil (Wiese et al., 1986) and atrazine plus bentazone (Hamill and Zhang, 1997) have been used to control A. artemisiifolia. However, herbicide resistance of A. artemisiifolia to atrazine has been reported (Igrc, 1987, Maceljski and Igrc, 1990). Dicamba and rimsulfuron plus thifensulfuron-methyl tank-mixed with primisulfuron-methyl were also found to control A. artemisiifolia in maize by at least 88% (Isaacs et al., 2002).
For spring barley, Metsulfuron-methyl, 2,4-D plus dicamba, and triasulfuron plus dicamba plus 2,4-D controlled A. artemisiifolia (Zhidkov et al., 2002).
For control of A. artemisiifolia in peanut, bentazone plus paraquat followed by imazapic (Richburg et al., 1996), acifluorfen plus bentazone (Wilcut, 1991; York et al., 1995), acifluorfen plus 2,4-DB (Wilcut, 1991), preplant incorporated tank-mixtures (Jordan et al., 1994), ethalfluralin plus vernolate preplant incorporated and paraquat applied one week after emergence (Wilcut and Swann, 1990) have been used successfully. Pre-emergence treatments of diclosulam controlled common ragweed by 100% (Price and Wilcut, 2002).
In glyphosate-tolerant cotton, A. artemisiifolia was controlled with clomazone pre-emergence and glyphosate (Scott et al., 2002). Flumioxazin tank-mixed with the isopropylamine salt of glyphosate, paraquat or the trimethylsulfonium salt of glyphosate controlled common ragweed by 96%, 29 to 43 days after treatment in strip-tillage cotton (Price et al., 2002). Bromoxynil plus pyrithiobac post-emergence or with MSMA controlled (90%) common ragweed in bromoxynil-resistant cotton early season.
In other crops, A. artemisiifolia has been controlled with fluroxypyr in small grains (Riggle et al., 1999), oxyfluorfen in broccoli (Eaton et al., 1990), sulfometuron in Pinus taeda seedlings (Miller, 1990), terbacil applied pre-emergence in watermelon (Beste, 1989) and clopyralid in rutabagas (Brolley, 1990). In tomato (Ackley et al., 1997) or potato (Ackley et al., 1996), control of A. artemisiifolia was attained with rimsulfuron plus metribuzin, or metribuzin plus metolachlor applied pre-emergence in potato (Hoyt and Monks, 1996; Bailey et al., 2001).
An acetolactate synthase (ALS)-resistant A. artemisiifolia biotype has been found in Indiana (Patzoldt et al., 2001) and Ohio, USA (Taylor et al., 2002).
IPM
Crop rotations using herbicides that control A. artemisiifolia are crucial for managing A. artemisiifolia in sunflower (Helianthus annuus) fields. Mechanical weed control of A. artemisiifolia and other weeds has been shown to increase seed yield of sunflower (Fleck et al., 1989).
Gaps in Knowledge/Research Needs
Top of pageMore detailed phytosociological studies of non-native areas in which A. artemisiifolia is naturalized/invasive could be conducted to provide a better insight on the impact of this species.
References
Top of pageAllard HA, 1943. The North American ragweeds and their occurrence in other parts of the world. Science, 98:292-294.
Banaras M, 1993. Impact of weed competition on potato production. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Research, 14 (1):64-71.
Bassett IJ; Crompton CW; Marmelee JA, 1978. Canada Department of Agriculture. Ottowa, Canada 334 pp.
Becker H, 2001. Fungi can whack invasive weeds. Agricultural Research (Washington), 49(11):18-19.
Beres I, 1994. New investigations on the biology of Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. 46th International Symposium on Crop Protection, 59:1295-1297.
Beres I; Sardi K; Kaman S; Maillet J, 1998. Allelopathic effects of Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. on germination and seedling growth of field crops. Comptes rendus 6eme symposium Mediterraneen EWRS, 89-90.
Bertrand P; Maupas E, 1996. Ragweed, invasive and allergenic!. Phytoma, No. 484:25-26.
Bezruchenko NZ; Chukarin NN, 1956. About Ambrosia artemisiifolia (shoots of weed and control). Botanich. Journal, 41(5):712-713.
Bohár G; Schwarczinger I, 1999. First report of Septoria sp. on common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) in Europe. Plant Disease, 83:696.
Bosak P; Mod S, 2000. Influence of different weed species on sugar beet yield. Novenytermeles, 49(5):571-580.
Botanical Survey of India, 2016. Checklist of plants of India. http://efloraindia.nic.in/efloraindia/homePage.action
Bruckner D; Czimber G; Pinke G, 1997. Changes in the weed flora of maize fields in Szigetkoz (north-west Hungary) between 1990 and 1996. Acta Agronomica Ovariensis, 39:15-19.
Bruckner DJ; Lepossa A; Herpai Z, 2001. Ragweed allelopathy: indirect interactions. Novenytermeles, 50(2-3):231-236.
Bullock J; Haynes T; Beal S; Wheeler B; Dickie I; Phang Xm Tinch R; Civic K; Delbaere B; Jones-Walters L; Hilbert A; Schrauwen A; Prank M; Sofiev M; Niemelä S; Räisänen P; Lees B; Skinner M; Finch F; Brough C, 2010. Assessing and controlling the spread and the effects of common ragweed in Europe. Final report: ENV.B2/ETU/2010/0037. 456 pp. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/invasivealien/docs/Final_Final_Report.pdf
CCDB, 2016. Chromosome counts database. http://ccdb.tau.ac.il/home/
Chauvel B; Martinez Q, 2012. Second International Ragweed Conference, France, Lyon, 28-29th October, 2012.
CJB, 2016. African Plant Database. Conservatoire et Jardin Botaniques de la Ville de Geneve, Geneva, Switzerland, and South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria, South Africa. Geneva, Switzerland: CJB/SANBI. http://www.ville-ge.ch/musinfo/bd/cjb/africa/
Clewis SB; Askew SD; Wilcut JW, 2002. Common ragweed interference in peanut. Weed-Science, 49(6):768-772.
Council of Heads of Australasian Herbaria, 2016. Australia's Virtual Herbarium., Australia: Council of Heads of Australasian Herbaria. http://avh.ala.org.au
Crockett LJ, 1977. Wildly Successful Plants: A Handbook of North American Weeds. New York, USA: Mackmillan Publishing Co., Inc.
Culpepper AS; York AC, 1997. Weed management in no-till bromoxynil-tolerant cotton Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technology, 11:335-345.
Danner K-M; Intress J; Beuche H; Selbeck J; Dworak W, 2012. Discrimination of Ambrosia artemisiifolia and Artemisia vulgaris by hyperspectral image analysis during the growing season. Weed Research, 53(2):146-156.
EPPO, 2000. Weeds as potential quarantine pests. EPPO Reporting Service 2000, No.1. 002.
EPPO, 2014. PQR database. Paris, France: European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. http://www.eppo.int/DATABASES/pqr/pqr.htm
Euro+Med, 2016. Euro+Med PlantBase - the information resource for Euro-Mediterranean plant diversity. http://www.emplantbase.org/home.html
Feher Z; Farkas I; Erdei E; Gallovich E; Csoltko G; Wimmer J; Klatsmanyi JM; Laczik M; Szintaine DJ; Borsanyi A; Oravecz A; Farkas L; Magyar D, 1998. Analysis of ragweed seasons on the basis of Hungarian Aeroallergens Network (1992-1997). Egeszsegtudomany, 42(1):61-69.
Flora of China Editorial Committee, 2016. Flora of China. St. Louis, Missouri and Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden and Harvard University Herbaria. http://www.efloras.org/flora_page.aspx?flora_id=2
Gentili R; Gilardelli F; Bona E; Prosser F; Selvaggi A; Alessandrini A; Martini F; Nimis PL; Wilhalm T; Adorni M; Ardenghi NMG; Barni E; Bonafede F; Bonini M; Bouvet D; Buffa G; Ciappetta S; Giordana F; Faggi G; Ghiani A; Ghillani L; Marcucci R; Masin R; Morelli V; Montagnani C; Montanari S; Peccenini S; Pellizzari M; Romani E; Saiani D; Scortegagna S; Sirotti M; Truzzi A; Vignodelli M; Bagli L; Fiandri F; Siniscalco C; Citterio S, 2016. Distribution map of Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. (Asteraceae) in Italy. lant Biosystems:1-6.
Gudzinskas Z, 1993. Genus Ambrosia L. (Asteraceae) in Lithuania. Thaiszia, 3(1):89-96
Hind DJN; Jeffrey C; Scott AJ, 1993. [English title not available]. (Flore de Mascareignes 109. Composées.) . Sugar Industry Research Institute, Institut Français de Recherche Scientifique pour le Développement en Coopération.
Kazinczi G; Horvath J; Takacs A, 2001. Role of weeds in the epidemiology of viruses. In: Proceedings of the 5th Slovenian Conference on Plant Protection, Catez ob Savi, Slovenia, 6-8 March 2001, 222-226.
King LJ, 1966. Weeds of the World. Biology and Control. New York, USA: Interscience Publ.
Ling X-M; Liao W-J; Wokfe LM; Zhang D-J, 2012. No evolutionary shift in the mating system of North American Ambrosia artemisiifolia (Asteraceae) following its introduction to China. PlosOne, 7(2):e31935.
Linnaeus C, 1753. Species Plantarum. Volume 2. Stockholm, Sweden: Laurentii Salvii, 639 pp.
Love D, 1976. CLXIX Compositae. 49. Ambrosia L. In: Tutin TG, Heywood VH, Burges NA, Moore DM, Valentine DH, Walters SM, Webb DA, 1980. Flora Europaea Volume 4, Plantaginaceae to Compositae (and Rubiaceae). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Makodzeba IA, 1955. Ambrosia artemisiifolia and Control Methods of this Weed. Moscow, Russia: Selhozgiz.
Marjushkina VYa, 1986. Ambrosia artemisiifolia and biological control of this wed. Kiev, Ukraine: Naukova Dumka.
Moller H; Spiren A; Svensson A; Gruvberger B; Hindsen M; Bruze M, 2002. Contact allergy to the Asteraceae plant Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. (ragweed) in sesquiterpene lactone-sensitive patients in southern Sweden. Contact Dermatitis, 47(3):157-160.
Moskalenko GP, 2001. Quarantine Weeds for Russia. Moscow, Russia: Plant Quarantine Inspectorate.
Nechaev AP; Nechaev AA, 1973. Flora of Nizshnego Priamuria. Bull. GBS AN SSSR, 8:48-51.
Payne WW, 1970. Preliminary reports on the flora of Wisconsin. LXII. Compositae-composite family. 6. The genus Ambrosia-the ragweeds. Transact. Wisconsin Acad. Sci, 58:353-371.
Pichtel J; Kuroiwa K; Sawyerr HT, 2000. Distribution of Pb, Cd and Ba in soils and plants of two contaminated sites. Environmental Pollution, 110(1):171-178.
Reisinger P, 1992. Relationship between soil properties and weed flora. Acta Ovariensis, 34(2):17-23
Reznik SY, 2009. Common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.) in Russia: spread, distribution, abundance, harmfulness and control measures (L'ambroisie à feuilles d'armoise (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.) en Russie: propagation, distribution, abondance, dangerosité et mesures de contrôle). 10 pp. http://www.zin.ru/labs/expent/pdfs/reznik_2009_ambrosia.pdf
Reznik SY; Belokobyl' skii SA; Lobanov AL, 1994. Weed and herbivourous insect popoulation densities at the broad spatial scale: Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. and Zygogramma suturalis F. (Col., Chrysomelidae). Journal of Applied Entomology, 118:1-9.
Riggle B; Bearmore R; Mundt G; Jachetta J; Redding K; Christianson K, 1999. Fluroxypyr (Starane) for control of kochia and other broadleaf weeds in wheat and barley. Proceedings of the Western Society of Weed Science, 52:126.
Salisbury E, 1961. Weeds & Aliens. London, UK: Collins Clear-Type Press.
Siegelin SD; Lehman JD, 1998. Herbicide programs for glyphosate resistant soybeans (Glycine max). Proceedings Northe Central Weed Science Society, 53:17-19.
Singh K; Lal SS, 1994. Herbicidal weed-control efficiency and nutrient removal by weeds in potato (Solanum tuberosum) under northeast hills condition. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 39:336-339.
Spencer ER, 1957. Just Weeds. New York, USA: Charles Scribner's Sons.
Strother JL, 2006. Ambrosia L. Volume 8(3). Flora of North America North of México, 8(3).
Stubbendieck J; Friisoe GY; Bolick MR, 1995. Weeds of Nebraska and the Great Plains. Nebraska, USA: Nebraska Department of Agriculture.
The Linnean Society, 2016. The Linnean Collections. London, UK. http://linnean-online.org/
Tworkoski T, 2002. Herbicide effects of essential oils. Weed Science, 50(4):425-431.
USDA-ARS, 2016. Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). National Plant Germplasm System. Online Database. Beltsville, Maryland, USA: National Germplasm Resources Laboratory. https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/taxon/taxonomysearch.aspx
USDA-NRCS, 2016. The PLANTS Database. Baton Rouge, USA: National Plant Data Center. http://plants.usda.gov/
Vasiliev DS, 1958. Ambrosia artemisiifolia and Control Methods of this Weed. Krasnodar, Russia.
Vidotto F; Tesio F; Ferrero A, 2012. Allelopathic effects of Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. in the invasive process. Crop Protection, 54:161-167.
Vincent G; Deslauriers S; Cloutier D, 1992. Problems and eradication of Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. in Quebec in the urban and suburban environments. Allergie et immunologie (Paris), 24(3):84-89.
Voroshilov VN, 1966. Flora of Soviet Far East. Moscow, Russia: Nauka.
Wan FH, 1991. A literature review on Epiblema strenuana - a potential biological control agent of Ambrosia artemisiifolia and its feasibility of application in China. Chinese Journal of Biological Control, 7(4):177-180
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.
Yurukova-Grancharova P; Yankova-Tsvenkova E; Badljiev G; Vladimirov V, 2015. Reproductive characteristics of Ambrosia artemisiifolia and iva xanthiifolia - two invasive alien species in Bulgaria. Comptes rendus de l'Academie bulgare des Sciences, 68(7):853-862.
Zhan WM; Luo YL; Jiang RC, 1993. Study on selective herbicides for control of Ambrosia artemisiifolia at different stages. Plant Protection, 19:37.
Zhirong W, 1990. Farmland Weeds in China: A Collection of Coloured Illustrative Plates. Beijing, China: Agriculture Publishing House.
Links to Websites
Top of pageWebsite | URL | Comment |
---|---|---|
SMARTER Sustainable management of Ambrosia artemisiifolia in Europe | http://ragweed.eu/ |
Contributors
Top of page06/11/2016 Updated by:
Duilio Iamonico, University of Rome Sapienza, Rome, Italy
Distribution Maps
Top of pageUnsupported 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/