Chenopodium subglabrum - (S. Wats.) A. Nels.
Smooth Goosefoot
Other Common Names: smooth goosefoot
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Chenopodium subglabrum (S. Wats.) A. Nels. (TSN 20635)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.142321
Element Code: PDCHE091G0
Informal Taxonomy: Plants, Vascular - Flowering Plants - Goosefoot Family
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Plantae Anthophyta Dicotyledoneae Caryophyllales Chenopodiaceae Chenopodium
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: Chenopodium subglabrum
Taxonomic Comments: Welsh et al. (2008) include Chenopodium subglabrum in C. leptophyllum, but it is recognized as distinct by FNA (2003) and Kartesz (2009 draft).
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G3G4
Global Status Last Reviewed: 25Aug2016
Global Status Last Changed: 26Jan1998
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by calculator
Rounded Global Status: G3 - Vulnerable
Reasons: Limited to actively moving sand in the central to northern Great Plains. Population size varies from year to year, but many extant northern occurrences are small in size. There are enough occurrences in Wyoming, Colorado, and Nebraska that it is not tracked in these states; rare in other the states and provinces where it occurs. Not all available habitat has been searched and it is possible that more may be found.
Nation: United States
National Status: N3N4
Nation: Canada
National Status: N3 (26Feb2014)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
United States Colorado (SNR), Kansas (SH), Michigan (SNA), Montana (S2), Nebraska (S3S4), Nevada (SNR), North Dakota (S1), South Dakota (S2), Utah (SNR), Washington (SNA), Wyoming (S3)
Canada Alberta (S1), British Columbia (S1), Manitoba (S1), Saskatchewan (S3)

Other Statuses

Canadian Species at Risk Act (SARA) Schedule 1/Annexe 1 Status: T (13Dec2007)
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC): Threatened (29Apr2006)
Comments on COSEWIC: Designated Special Concern in April 1992. Status re-examined and designated Threatened in April 2006.

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent Comments: FNA (2003) shows the discontinuous distribution of Chenopodium subglabrum from Alberta and Saskatchewan, with an outlying dot in Manitoba, south through Montana, Wyoming, Utah, and Colorado, east to the very western edges of the Dakotas and into the western third of Nebraska, with outlying dots in Washington, Nevada, and Iowa. Kartesz (2009 draft data) shows the outlying reports in Washington, Nevada, and Iowa as introduced. There is a collection from an historical population in Kansas that is thought to be C. subglabrum (C. Freeman, pers. comm., Dec. 2009), but perhaps due to a data error is not on the FNA map.

Area of Occupancy: Unknown 4-km2 grid cells
Area of Occupancy Comments: The species is limited to active sandy areas within its range so area of occupancy is quite small compared to its extent, but there is not enough information on each population to make an estimate.

Number of Occurrences: 21 - 300
Number of Occurrences Comments: Canada has approximately 30 extant occurrences, mostly in Saskatchewan (EO data, Dec. 2009; COSEWIC 2006). In the U.S., there could be close to 100 occurrences. There are few documented, viable occurrences in Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota (about 5 each), although not all appropriate habitat has been surveyed in South Dakota (D. Ode, pers. comm., Dec. 2009). However, in Wyoming, Colorado, and Nebraska the species is not tracked because so many populations have been found: 40 recent collections in Wyoming (B. Heidel, pers. comm. Dec. 2009); 15 recent collections from 8 counties in eastern Colorado (CU Museum Herbarium's Specimen Database of Colorado Vascular Plants, Dec. 2009); probably widespread, though not common in the western Sandhills of Nebraska (G. Steinauer, pers. comm., Dec. 2009). Since Welsh et al. (2008) do not recognize the species, it is difficult to determine the number of occurrences in Utah.

Population Size Comments: Northern populations are often not large, having just a few individuals, however, some of these populations have been found to have several hundred plants (Element Occurrrence data as of Dec. 2009). COSEWIC (2006) estimated 5,200 to 10,000 individuals in Canada, however, they point out that, since this is an annual species, population size varies from year to year depending on climate. Less information about individual population health is available in states where the species is not tracked, however, it seems likely that many of these populations are large.

Number of Occurrences with Good Viability/Integrity: Some to many (13-125)
Viability/Integrity Comments: Not all occurrences have been documented and ranked, but based on comments from botanists in the center of the range, there are probably more than 20 occurrences with good viability.

Overall Threat Impact: Medium
Overall Threat Impact Comments: Threatened by leafy spurge and tamarisk invasions, changes to flow regimes, and overgrazing or successional advance in the absence of natural/other disturbances. Riparian habitat is more threatened than sand dune habitat. COSEWIC (2006) indicates that dune stabilization and fire control are also threats as well as oil and gas development and recreational activities in active dunes.

Short-term Trend: Decline of 10-30%
Short-term Trend Comments: The Montana riparian occurrence where it was noted as common in 1973 is believed extirpated, whether due to flow regime change, natural succession, or tamarisk invasion.

Intrinsic Vulnerability Comments: Requires early seral stages that are susceptible to degradation.

Environmental Specificity: Narrow. Specialist or community with key requirements common.
Environmental Specificity Comments: Liimited to dunes or sandy banks which are regularly disturbed. This habitat is relatively common in the Great Plains, but still somewhat fragmented.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: FNA (2003) shows the discontinuous distribution of Chenopodium subglabrum from Alberta and Saskatchewan, with an outlying dot in Manitoba, south through Montana, Wyoming, Utah, and Colorado, east to the very western edges of the Dakotas and into the western third of Nebraska, with outlying dots in Washington, Nevada, and Iowa. Kartesz (2009 draft data) shows the outlying reports in Washington, Nevada, and Iowa as introduced. There is a collection from an historical population in Kansas that is thought to be C. subglabrum (C. Freeman, pers. comm., Dec. 2009), but perhaps due to a data error is not on the FNA map.

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces
Color legend for Distribution Map

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States CO, KS, MIexotic, MT, ND, NE, NV, SD, UT, WAexotic, WY
Canada AB, BC, MB, SK

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
MT Carter (30011), Cascade (30013), Custer (30017)*, Powder River (30075), Sheridan (30091)
ND Billings (38007), Golden Valley (38033)*, Slope (38087)
NE Blaine (31009)*, Cherry (31031), Garden (31069)*, Hooker (31091), Scotts Bluff (31157), Sheridan (31161)*, Sioux (31165), Thomas (31171)
SD Harding (46063), Perkins (46105), Todd (46121)
WY Carbon (56007), Converse (56009), Goshen (56015), Laramie (56021), Natrona (56025), Niobrara (56027), Platte (56031)*
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
10 Upper Missouri-Dearborn (10030102)+, Big Muddy (10060006)+, Lower Wind (10080005)+, Lower Powder (10090209)+, O'fallon (10100005)+, Upper Little Missouri (10110201)+, Middle Little Missouri (10110203)+, Lance (10120104)+, Hat (10120108)+, South Fork Grand (10130302)+, South Fork Moreau (10130304)+*, Upper Moreau (10130305)+*, Little White (10140203)+, Niobrara Headwaters (10150002)+, Upper Niobrara (10150003)+*, Middle Niobrara (10150004)+, Snake (10150005)+, Pathfinder-Seminoe Reservoirs (10180003)+, Middle North Platte-Casper (10180007)+, Glendo Reservoir (10180008)+*, Middle North Platte-Scotts Bluff (10180009)+, Horse (10180012)+, Pumpkin (10180013)+, Lower Lodgepole (10190016)+, Upper Middle Loup (10210001)+*, Dismal (10210002)+, Upper North Loup (10210006)+*
14 Great Divide closed basin (14040200)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Basic Description: Shallow-rooted annual herb with many ascending, branched stems, 20-80 cm tall; leaves are alternate, linear, smooth-edged, fleshy, one-veined, and usually hairless; flowers small, greenish-reddish and produced in widely spaced small rounded clusters; seeds are lens-shaped, black, and shiny (COSEWIC 2006).
General Description: Smooth Goosefoot is an annual with erect, simple, or highly stems 2-3 (8) dm high. The alternate leaves are linear with entire margins, single veined, glabrous, up to 3 cm long. The small, green flowers are grouped in remote clusters in simple or branched spikes. Each flower lacks petals but has 5 glabrous sepals and 5 stamens. The 1-seeded fruit is compressed hemispheric and is relatively large; 1-2 mm across, exposing a jet-black fruit at maturity that readily separates from the pericarp (fruit wall).
Diagnostic Characteristics: CHENOPODIUM SUBGLABRUM sometimes occurs with and is related to C. LEPTOPHYLLUM. They both have linear, single-veined leaves but the latter are farinose white. CHENOPODIUM LEPTOPHYLLUM also has densely-clustered glomerules, a relatively unbranched growth form, fruits usually 1 mm or smaller, and seeds which do not detach from the pericarp.
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Grassland/herbaceous
Habitat Comments: Chenopodium subglabrum occurs in sandy areas, particularly sand bars in rivers and in sandy blowouts near river banks (FNA 2004). It also grows in the stabilizing sand at the edges of active dunes and blowouts (COSEWIC 2006).
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
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) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 14Jun1991
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Broaddus, Lynn; rev. B. Heidel (1999), rev. G. Davis (2009)
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 13Oct1994
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): JM

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
  • COSEWIC 2006. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the smooth goosefoot
    Chenopodium subglabrum in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada.
    Ottawa. vi + 33 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm).

  • COSEWIC. 2006. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the smooth goosefoot Chenopodium subglabrum in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vi + 33 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm).

  • Data for WCMC Threatened Plants of the World project. 1994. Unpublished notes on state ranks from heritage botanists, sent to L. Kutner at The Nature Conservancy Home Office.

  • Flora of North America Editorial Committee. 2003b. Flora of North America North of Mexico. Vol. 4, Magnoliophyta: Caryophyllidae, part 1. Oxford University Press, New York. 559 pp.

  • Heidel, B. L. and K. H. Dueholm. 1995. Sensitive plant survey in the Sioux District, Custer National Forest, 1994, Carter County, Montana and Harding County, South Dakota. Unpublished report to the Custer National Forest. Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, Montana. 95 pp. plus appendices.

  • 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. 2009. Floristic Synthesis of North America. Biota of North America (BONAP). (in press).

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.