Artemisia annua - L.
Annual Wormwood
Other Common Names: sweet sagewort
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Artemisia annua L. (TSN 35448)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.144399
Element Code: PDAST0S050
Informal Taxonomy: Plants, Vascular - Flowering Plants - Aster Family
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Plantae Anthophyta Dicotyledoneae Asterales Asteraceae Artemisia
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
Concept Reference Code: B94KAR01HQUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Artemisia annua
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: GNR
Global Status Last Changed: 22Mar1994
Rounded Global Status: GNR - Not Yet Ranked
Nation: United States
National Status: NNA
Nation: Canada
National Status: NNA (11Oct2016)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
United States Alabama (SNA), Arizona (SNA), Arkansas (SNA), California (SNA), Colorado (SNA), Connecticut (SNA), Delaware (SNA), District of Columbia (SNA), Idaho (SNA), Illinois (SNA), Indiana (SNA), Iowa (SNA), Kansas (SNA), Kentucky (SNA), Louisiana (SNA), Maine (SNA), Maryland (SNA), Massachusetts (SNR), Michigan (SNA), Mississippi (SNA), Missouri (SNA), Montana (SNA), New Hampshire (SNA), New Jersey (SNA), New York (SNA), Ohio (SNA), Oklahoma (SNA), Oregon (SNA), Pennsylvania (SNA), Tennessee (SNA), Utah (SNA), Vermont (SNA), Virginia (SNA), Washington (SNA), West Virginia (SNA), Wisconsin (SNA), Wyoming (SNA)
Canada New Brunswick (SNA), Ontario (SNA), Prince Edward Island (SNA), Quebec (SNA)

Other Statuses

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
U.S. States and Canadian Provinces
Color legend for Distribution Map
NOTE: The distribution shown may be incomplete, particularly for some rapidly spreading exotic species.

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States ALexotic, ARexotic, AZexotic, CAexotic, COexotic, CTexotic, DCexotic, DEexotic, IAexotic, IDexotic, ILexotic, INexotic, KSexotic, KYexotic, LAexotic, MA, MDexotic, MEexotic, MIexotic, MOexotic, MSexotic, MTexotic, NHexotic, NJexotic, NYexotic, OHexotic, OKexotic, ORexotic, PAexotic, TNexotic, UTexotic, VAexotic, VTexotic, WAexotic, WIexotic, WVexotic, WYexotic
Canada NBexotic, ONexotic, PEexotic, QCexotic

Range Map
No map available.

Ecology & Life History Not yet assessed
Help
Economic Attributes
Help
Economically Important Genus: Y
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank)
Help
Disclaimer: While I-Rank information is available over NatureServe Explorer, NatureServe is not actively developing or maintaining these data. Species with I-RANKs do not represent a random sample of species exotic in the United States; available assessments may be biased toward those species with higher-than-average impact.

I-Rank: Medium/Insignificant
Rounded I-Rank: Unknown
I-Rank Reasons Summary: The ecology/invasive characteristics of this species is not referred to in any recent texts, with most information from texts 50+ years old. Unlikely to be a problem species. Was not even able to ascertain with 100% confidence whether it is in natural areas or not.
Subrank I - Ecological Impact: Medium/Insignificant
Subrank II - Current Distribution/Abundance: Medium/Low
Subrank III - Trend in Distribution/Abundance: Low
Subrank IV - Management Difficulty: Low/Insignificant
I-Rank Review Date: 19May2004
Evaluator: Fellows, M.
Native anywhere in the U.S?
Native Range: Eurasia (Randall 2002); Asia, probably China (Jannick 1995).

Download "An Invasive Species Assessment Protocol: Evaluating Non-Native Plants for their Impact on Biodiversity". (PDF, 1.03MB)
Provide feedback on the information presented in this assessment

Screening Questions

S-1. Established outside cultivation as a non-native? YES
Comments: (Kartesz 1999)

S-2. Present in conservation areas or other native species habitat? Yes
Comments: Disturbed areas (Baldwin et al. 2004) and roadsides, wasteland and fallow fields (Weeds 1960).

Subrank I - Ecological Impact: Medium/Insignificant

1. Impact on Ecosystem Processes and System-wide Parameters:Low significance/Insignificant
Comments: No reported ecosystem effects, therefore, inferred to be low or insignificant.

2. Impact on Ecological Community Structure:Unknown

3. Impact on Ecological Community Composition:High/Low significance
Comments: Reports of alleopathy (Chen et al 1991) and/or a natural herbicide (Ferreira and Janick 1996).

4. Impact on Individual Native Plant or Animal Species:Unknown

5. Conservation Significance of the Communities and Native Species Threatened:Insignificant
Comments: Cultivated (Janick 1995) or found on disturbed sites (Baldwin et al. 2004).

Subrank II. Current Distribution and Abundance: Medium/Low

6. Current Range Size in Nation:High significance
Comments: > 50% of US states Kartesz 1999

7. Proportion of Current Range Where the Species is Negatively Impacting Biodiversity:Low significance/Insignificant
Comments: Inferred from lack of any reports of a negative impact, not considered to be a troublesome weed (Weeds 1960).

8. Proportion of Nation's Biogeographic Units Invaded:High/Moderate significance
Comments: Potential to occur in over 50 US ecoregions (inferred from Kartesz 1999 and TNC 2001). But a very patchy distribution, so probably not in the maximum number: confirmed in 4 ecoregions (see county distribution in Tennessee); listed as rare (Weeds 1960) or infrequent in east and west (Muenscher 1980). Reported as being present in Great Central Valley Ecoregion only (Baldwin et al. 2004).

9. Diversity of Habitats or Ecological Systems Invaded in Nation:Medium/Low significance
Comments: Naturally occurs as part of steppe vegetation, at 1000-1500 m above sea level (Janick 1995), sandy soils (Weeds 1960). No specific habitats are mentioned in the US range, but given the wide distribution, it is inferred to be several.

Subrank III. Trend in Distribution and Abundance: Low

10. Current Trend in Total Range within Nation:Low significance
Comments: Slow (has not expanded in CA beyond one ecoregion). There have been no new reports in 5 NW US states since 1989 (Rice 2003).

11. Proportion of Potential Range Currently Occupied:Not ranked

12. Long-distance Dispersal Potential within Nation:High significance
Comments: Available for purchase, and recommended (Janick 1995).

13. Local Range Expansion or Change in Abundance:Low significance
Comments: Slow (has not expanded in CA beyond one ecoregion). Is present in 12 counties in 5 NW states, first herbarium specimen in 1899 (Rice 2003).

14. Inherent Ability to Invade Conservation Areas and Other Native Species Habitats:Low significance/Insignificant
Comments: Inferred from lack of any report, despite a long history of cultivation.

15. Similar Habitats Invaded Elsewhere:High/Low significance
Comments: Naturalized in Argentina, Bulgaria, France, Hungary, Romania, Italy, Spain, US, former Yugoslavia (Ferreira and Janick 1996) and Canada (Kartesz 1999).

16. Reproductive Characteristics:Insignificant
Comments: Quickly growing annual plant, seeds once a year (Janick 1995).

Subrank IV. General Management Difficulty: Low/Insignificant

17. General Management Difficulty:Low significance
Comments: Plant is extremely vigorous and essentially disease and pest free (Janick 1995). Hand pulling, close mowing and 'clean cultivation' (Muenscher 1980).

18. Minimum Time Commitment:Low significance/Insignificant
Comments: Inferred from ease of control and lack of seedlings under many plants.

19. Impacts of Management on Native Species:Insignificant
Comments: Inferred from best management methods.

20. Accessibility of Invaded Areas:High/Moderate significance
Comments: Cultivated for wreaths and oil production (Janick 1995).
Authors/Contributors
Help

Botanical data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs), The North Carolina Botanical Garden, and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

References
Help
  • Baldwin, B.G., S. Boyd, B.J. Ertter, D.J. Keil, R.W. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti and D.H. Wilken. 2004.
    Jepson Flora Project, Jepson Online Interchange for California Floristics. Regents of the University of California, Berkeley. Online. Available: http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/jepson_flora_project.html (Accessed 2004).

  • Buchholtz, K.P., B.H. Grigsby, O.C. Lee, F.W. Slife, C.J. Willard, and N.J. Volk. (eds) 1960. Weeds of the North Central States. University of Illinois, Agricultural Experimental Station 262 pgs. Available: http://ag.uiuc.edu/~vista/htm_pubs/WEEDS/list.html. (Accessed 2004).

  • Chen, P. K.; M. Polatnik and G. Leather. 1991. Comparative study on Artemisnin, 2,4-D, and Glyphosate. J. Chem Ecology. 39:991-994.

  • Ferreira, J.F.S. and J. Janick. 1996. Distribution of artemisinin in Artemisia annua. P. 579-584. In: J. Janick (ed.), Progress in new crops. ASHS Press, Arlington, VA.

  • Janick, J. 1995. Annual Wormwood. ONLINE. . Accessed 12/22/03.

  • Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.

  • Kartesz, J.T. 1999. A synonymized checklist and atlas with biological attributes for the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. First edition. In: Kartesz, J.T., and C.A. Meacham. Synthesis of the North American Flora, Version 1.0. North Carolina Botanical Garden, Chapel Hill, N.C.

  • Muenscher, W. C. 1955. Weeds. The MacMillan Co., New York.

  • Randall, R.P. 2002. A global compendium of weeds. R.G. and F.J. Richardson, Melbourne. 905 pp.

  • Rice, P. 2003. Invaders Database System. Risk Assessment for Potentially Noxious Species in Idaho and Montana. ONLINE http://invader.dbs.umt.edu. Accessed 2003, December and 2004.

  • The Nature Conservancy. 2001. Map: TNC Ecoregions of the United States. Modification of Bailey Ecoregions. Online . Accessed May 2003.

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of November 2016.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2017 NatureServe, 4600 N. Fairfax Dr., 7th Floor, Arlington Virginia 22203, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2017. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.