Chenopodium glaucum var. glaucum L.

Common Name: Oakleaf goosefoot

Synonyms and Other Names:

oakleaf goosefoot, glaucous goosefoot, Chenopodium glaucum var. glaucum, Chenonopodium glaucun spp. euglaucum Aellen



Copyright Info

Identification: Individuals of this species can range from 5-75 cm in height and typically have ascending or prostrate stems. The oblong leaves are oriented in an alternate, petiolate formation, are cuneate (wedge-shaped) at the base, smooth, and typically serrated around the edge. Its leaves appear dark-green from above but powdered from below and have a yellow-green, protruded middle ridge (Larina 2008). Its flowers are bisexual, arranged in small clusters (glomerules) at the end of stems, forming short and dense spike-shaped inflorescences (Arbak and Blackwell 1982, Larina 2008). Its ovoid to round seeds are oriented horizontally (mostly) or vertically, with rounded margins and a reddish brown seed coat.


Size: 10 to 50 cm


Native Range: Eurasia


Map Key
This map only depicts Great Lakes introductions.

 
Great Lakes Nonindigenous Occurrences: First collected in the Great Lakes in 1867 in the Lake Ontario drainage on the shores of Onondaga Lake near Syracuse, New York (Mills et al. 1995)


Table 1. Great Lakes region nonindigenous occurrences, the earliest and latest observations in each state/province, and the tally and names of HUCs with observations†. Names and dates are hyperlinked to their relevant specimen records. The list of references for all nonindigenous occurrences of Chenopodium glaucum var. glaucum are found here.

State/ProvinceFirst ObservedLast ObservedTotal HUCs with observations†HUCs with observations†
IN200820081Little Calumet-Galien
MI1879201533Betsie-Platte; Brule; Cheboygan; Clinton; Detroit; Escanaba; Great Lakes Region; Huron; Keweenaw Peninsula; Lake Huron; Lake Michigan; Lake St. Clair; Lone Lake-Ocqueoc; Lower Grand; Menominee; Michigamme; Muskegon; Northeastern Lake Michigan; Northwestern Lake Huron; Ontonagon; Ottawa-Stony; Pere Marquette-White; Pigeon-Wiscoggin; Pine; Raisin; Southeastern Lake Michigan; Southwestern Lake Huron-Lake Huron; St. Clair; St. Clair-Detroit; St. Joseph; St. Marys; Thunder Bay; Upper Grand
MN200820081St. Louis
NY186520089Eastern Lake Erie; Great Lakes Region; Lake Ontario; Lower Genesee; Oswego; Oswego; Seneca; Southwestern Lake Ontario; St. Lawrence
OH200820086Black-Rocky; Cuyahoga; Lake Erie; Sandusky; Southern Lake Erie; Western Lake Erie
PA200820081Lake Erie
WI200820088Fox; Lake Superior; Manitowoc-Sheboygan; Northwestern Lake Michigan; Northwestern Lake Michigan; Oconto; Southwestern Lake Michigan; Southwestern Lake Superior

Table last updated 5/2/2024

† Populations may not be currently present.


Ecology: This plant inhabits moist/wet environments with light soils (sand, humus and/or gravel), such as nutrient-rich swamps, marshes, and freshwater aquatic systems (e.g., ponds, lakes, rivers), as well as disturbed sites, such as roadsides, railroad tracks, and waste dumps (Arbak and Blackwell 1982, Duan et al. 2004, Larina 2008, USGS 2006). It is also found in some saline environments (e.g., salt marshes), although germination is most successful in freshwater conditions (Duan et al. 2004, Li et al. 2011 ). This early successional species is capable of surviving frequent trampling by animals (Mucina et al. 1991, Siegley et al. 1988).

Chenopodium glaucum flowers and bears fruits from June until September and can produce up to 3,000 seeds (Larina 2008, USGS 2006). This annual herb is capable of self-pollinating to produce viable seeds (Mulligan and Findlay 1970). Shading from green plants may inhibit germination. Seeds with arrested germination may still remain viable and capable of complete germination if moved to a more favorable environment (USGS 2006).
Chenopodium glaucum is one of the many members of the Chenopodium genus that is reported to produce saponins (Al-Jaber et al. 1992, Larina 2008).


Means of Introduction: Possible ballast release then spread by accidental transport via drainage ditches, railroads and highways (USEAP 2008).


Status: Established


Great Lakes Impacts:
Summary of species impacts derived from literature review. Click on an icon to find out more...

EnvironmentalSocioeconomicBeneficial



 

Current research on the environmental impact of Chenopodium glaucum in the Great Lakes is inadequate to support proper assessment.
Realized:
Chenopodium glaucum is capable of naturally hybridizing with C. rubrum, which is native to Ontario, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Minnesota (USDA NRCS 2012, Wisskirchen 2006).

Potential:
Chenopodium glaucum could pose a competitive threat to other Chenopodium spp. that extend into the Great Lakes for at least a part of their native range. These species include (but are not limited to): C. album, C. berlandieri, C. capitatum, C. foggii, C. humile, C. leptophyllum, C. overi, C. pallescens, C. pratericola, C. rubrum, C. salinum, C. simplex, C. standleyanum, and C. subglabrum (USDA NRCS 2012).

There is little or no evidence to support that Chenopodium glaucum has significant socio-economic impacts in the Great Lakes.
Realized:
Plants, such as C. glaucum, that contain saponins have been blamed for non-fatal poisonings in livestock, including poultry and swine. However, recent research suggests that saponins might be beneficial to other species with rumen digestion systems (Cornell University 2009).

Potential:
This species is described as a widespread weed in Russia, invading crop fields and vegetable gardens (Larina 2008).

There is little or no evidence to support that Chenopodium glaucum has significant beneficial effects in the Great Lakes.
Potential:
Chenopodium glaucum has the potential to enhance soil quality by improving soil texture, reducing soil salinity, and increasing soil organic matter (Duan et al. 2004). It is also able to take up mercury from contaminated soils. Application of thiosulphate greatly increases the solubility of mercury and increases phytoextraction by C. glaucum (Wang et al. 2011).

Chenopodium glaucum is reported to have some value as forage due to high protein content in its leaves; however, over fertilization and insufficient water can create high, potentially toxic, nitrate concentrations (Brotherson et al. 1980, Duan et al. 2004).


Management: Regulations (pertaining to the Great Lakes region)
There are no known regulations for this species.

Note: Check federal, state/provincial, and local regulations for the most up-to-date information.

Control
Biological
There are no known biological control methods for this species.

Physical
The occurrence of C. glaucum can be minimized in crop fields by timely spring tillage and early autumn plowing. Crop rotation with winter cereal grains may also be effective in controlling C. glaucum (Larina 2008).

Chemical
There are no known chemical control methods for this species.

Note: Check state/provincial and local regulations for the most up-to-date information regarding permits for control methods. Follow all label instructions.


Remarks: Several entities (segregate species, subspecies, varieties, and forms) have been described within the Chenopodium glaucum group. Most of the taxa represent morphological traits of individual or ecological variability and have little or no taxonomic importance. However, several entities are well delimited geographically.Varieties 3 or more (2 in the flora): North America, Asia.


References (click for full reference list)


Author: Cao, L., L. Berent, and A. Fusaro


Contributing Agencies:
NOAA GLRI Logo


Revision Date: 11/15/2018


Citation for this information:
Cao, L., L. Berent, and A. Fusaro, 2024, Chenopodium glaucum var. glaucum L.: U.S. Geological Survey, Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database, Gainesville, FL, and NOAA Great Lakes Aquatic Nonindigenous Species Information System, Ann Arbor, MI, https://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/greatlakes/FactSheet.aspx?Species_ID=2677&Potential=N&Type=0&HUCNumber=DGreatLakes, Revision Date: 11/15/2018, Access Date: 5/2/2024

This information is preliminary or provisional and is subject to revision. It is being provided to meet the need for timely best science. The information has not received final approval by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and is provided on the condition that neither the USGS nor the U.S. Government shall be held liable for any damages resulting from the authorized or unauthorized use of the information.