No. 11
Chicory
Cichorium intybus
Leaves & tender stems young basal leaves
Drawing: Britton & Brown, Illustrated Flora (1913)
- Find
- Everywhere
- Effort
- Grab & eat
- ID risk
- Beginner
- Origin
- non-native
- Uses
- Eat raw / salad
- Cooked vegetable / soup
Season
- Jan
- Feb
- Mar
- Apr
- May
- Jun
- Jul
- Aug
- Sep
- Oct
- Nov
- Dec
in season peak
What these mean
Find
1 Everywhere · 2 Common in the right habitat · 3 Patchy · 4 Elusive. This is about how much there is, not whether you may pick it. It is based on iNaturalist sightings within 25 km (about 15 miles) of downtown DC, counted on October 3, 2026. The four rules that each plant’s “Find” reason refers to: (A) the estimate is the confirmed sightings, plus the unconfirmed ones (scaled down where the plant has lookalikes in its genus), plus the sightings marked as planted; (B) the tier by estimate: 1,500 or more is tier 1, 250–1,499 tier 2, 50–249 tier 3, under 50 tier 4; (C) tier 1, Everywhere, also needs a source saying the plant is common in lawns, sidewalks, yards or gardens, vacant lots or towns, or at least one DC street tree of it per km of sidewalk, otherwise it is tier 2; (D) if a reliable source says the plant is rare in this region, or that wild plants rarely bear the harvest, only planted sightings count. iNaturalist is a website and phone app where people post photos of the plants and animals they see. A sighting is “research grade” when other users have confirmed what it is; “needs ID” sightings are not confirmed yet, and “cultivated” ones are marked as planted.
Effort
1 Grab & eat · 2 Quick kitchen prep (under about 30 minutes) · 3 Real work (hours, or cooking needed for safety) · 4 Project (days or equipment). Scored on the simplest worthwhile use; each plant’s page says why.
ID risk
How hard it is to harvest safely. Beginner: no dangerous lookalike, and the edible part is not easily confused with a toxic part. Careful: a toxic lookalike, or toxic parts that end up in the harvest unless removed (for example elderberry stems, unripe ground cherries), or other parts of the plant rated medium-or-higher toxicity, with reliable features to separate them. Expert only: a potentially deadly lookalike that is hard to separate, or (for not-recommended harvests like pokeweed) a plant whose safe preparation can’t be guaranteed. Toxic parts that are obviously separate and thrown away anyway (pits, seeds, skins) don’t raise it; the Toxic parts mark carries that warning.
Native or not, and the invader stars
Origin is where the plant comes from: native, non-native, or mixed (the harvest covers both). The stars rate plants on invasive plant lists: ★★★ Virginia DCR “High” or Maryland prohibited invasive · ★★ Virginia “Medium” · ★ Virginia “Low” · ☆ listed only by the Maryland Invasive Species Council or the Mid-Atlantic Plant Invaders guide (advisory) · no stars: native or not listed.
Seasons
Start, peak and end are given in thirds of a month: early, mid or late. A plant counts as in season for a month if it is in season at any point in that month. Some greens and roots have a second window, in spring or fall; their page shows each window. A season that runs across New Year is shown as one window.
What it looks like
A deep-rooted perennial that starts as a dandelion-like rosette of toothed, slightly hairy leaves, then sends up stiff, branching stems with sky-blue flowers that close by midday. The leaves are bitter, much like dandelion.
Safety
No toxicity noted in sources. Rosettes resemble dandelion and other lettuce-family plants (all with milky sap); confirm by the hairy leaves and, later, blue flowers. Roadside plants may be sprayed or polluted.
Lookalikes
Dandelion Taraxacum officinale harmless (may be edible)
Chicory rosettes have hairy leaves and later bear blue flowers; dandelion is also edible, so the confusion is harmless.
- Cichorium intybus (Chicory) NC State Extension Gardener Plant Toolbox
- Taraxacum officinale (Dandelion) NC State Extension Gardener Plant Toolbox
Safety marks and flags: what this means
Deadly lookalike / Toxic lookalike: a cited source names a lookalike of that danger. Deadly means a source says eating it may be fatal or calls it deadly, or NC State rates it high severity with life-threatening symptoms (sources sometimes disagree; for example Virginia creeper). Each plant’s Lookalikes list says how to tell them apart; “harmless (may be edible)” lookalikes are listed so you know a mix-up isn’t dangerous. Cook first: cooking is needed for safety (for daylilies it is a precaution, not a sourced requirement). Eat in moderation: a source says to limit quantity or frequency (for example oxalates in sorrels and dock, ginkgotoxin, safrole). Spray risk: a source says the plant is commonly treated with herbicide in parks or lawns (invasive control, lawn weeds) or, for ginkgo, sprayed to stop fruiting. Contamination: a source says the plant concentrates pollutants. Each plant’s Safety flags list gives the details and sources.
- ID risk
- Beginner
- Why
- Rosettes resemble dandelion and other lettuce-family plants, none of which are named as toxic; confirm by the hairy leaves and later the blue flowers.
- Soil risk
- higher
ID risk: what this means
How hard it is to harvest safely. Beginner: no dangerous lookalike, and the edible part is not easily confused with a toxic part. Careful: a toxic lookalike, or toxic parts that end up in the harvest unless removed (for example elderberry stems, unripe ground cherries), or other parts of the plant rated medium-or-higher toxicity, with reliable features to separate them. Expert only: a potentially deadly lookalike that is hard to separate, or (for not-recommended harvests like pokeweed) a plant whose safe preparation can’t be guaranteed. Toxic parts that are obviously separate and thrown away anyway (pits, seeds, skins) don’t raise it; the Toxic parts mark carries that warning.
Soil risk: what this means
Based on the part you eat, following the urban-soil lead guidance on the Field safety page: higher for greens, shoots and roots; moderate for flowers; low for fruit, nuts and sap.
Field safety for every outing (poison ivy, ticks, soil, and more)
When to pick
Window 1
- Starts
- early Mar
- Peak
- late Mar–late Mar
- Ends
- late Apr
Window 2
- Starts
- early Oct
- Peak
- –
- Ends
- late Nov
Pick young rosette leaves in early spring, before the flower stalk appears; after that they are very bitter (Missouri Department of Conservation Wild Edibles, March–April). Around DC chicory starts flowering in mid-May (iNaturalist), so spring picking ends by late April. Fall rosettes are a second, less documented window.
How the dates were worked out
Every start, peak and end was re-checked in October 2026. “Sourced” means a source opened during the check states that timing for the DC or Mid-Atlantic area. “Estimated” means no source states it exactly; the reason, the evidence and the source links are under “How the dates were worked out” on each plant’s page. Peaks are often estimated, because few sources name a peak. iNaturalist evidence means research-grade sightings near DC, by month, of the plant at that stage (for example, in fruit). iNaturalist is a website and phone app where people post photos of the plants and animals they see. A sighting is “research grade” when other users have confirmed what it is; “needs ID” sightings are not confirmed yet, and “cultivated” ones are marked as planted.
Season basis: estimated: start (window 1), peak (window 1), end (window 1), start (window 2), end (window 2)
Window 1: Start
estimated: Missouri source, not Mid-Atlantic; iNaturalist DC has almost no rosette-stage chicory observations (0 in March, 3 in April) to confirm.
Window 1: Peak
estimated: No source gives a peak; late March is mid-way through the Missouri March–April window.
Window 1: End
estimated: Bolting precedes flowering by a few weeks, so late April is inferred as the end of good leaves.
Window 1: Evidence
start: Missouri Wild Edibles: leaves collected March–April; the early-spring rosette resembles dandelion. | peak: Missouri Wild Edibles: early-spring rosettes; leaves must be gathered before the bloom stalk appears. | end: Missouri Wild Edibles: gather before the bloom stalk appears, as leaves are 'VERY bitter afterwards'. iNaturalist DC flowering obs begin in week 20 (about May 14-20: 5 obs) and climb to 40 by week 23.
- Wild Edibles of Missouri (Jan Phillips) Missouri Department of Conservation
- api.inaturalist.org/v1/observations/histogram
Window 2: Start
estimated: No source gives a fall leaf harvest; fall rosettes are an inference from the plant’s rosette habit.
Window 2: Peak
Window 2: End
estimated: End before hard freezes is a judgment; no source.
Window 2: Evidence
start: NC State: first-year plants form a rosette of edible, though bitter, leaves.
- Cichorium intybus (Chicory) NC State Extension Gardener Plant Toolbox
Where to look
Roadsides, medians, field edges and gardens, easy to spot by the blue summer flowers; logged in Rock Creek Park and along Four Mile Run (no picking), so use private fields and gardens with permission, away from road spray.
- Habitats
- disturbed ground & waste places, old fields & meadows
Habitats: what this means
Listed where the plant’s own sources place it in that habitat. “Disturbed ground & waste places” means a cited source places it on disturbed areas, sites, soil or ground, on waste places or waste ground, on construction or abandoned building sites (old home sites count), on rubble or in strip mines. When the source gives examples of the disturbed places, at least one example must be of that kind. Examples that do not count: natural or forestry disturbance (treefall gaps, fire, windthrow, flood scour, old riverbanks and creeks, clear-cuts); roadsides, railroads and rights-of-way; and abandoned fields, pastures and farmland, which are “Old fields & meadows”. “Vacant lots” only where a source says vacant or empty lots.
Most-logged places
None of the most-logged places allows picking.
No picking here (5 places)
- Rock Creek Park
Look but don’t pick: Rock Creek Park’s compendium bans gathering any fruit, nut, berry, seed or greenery.
- Four Mile Run stream valley (Arlington/Alexandria)
Look but don’t pick: Arlington County park rules (flora shall not be removed or disturbed) and Alexandria’s permit rule both apply.
- Rock Creek Regional Park (MD)
Look but don’t pick: Montgomery/Prince George’s parks (M-NCPPC) ban harvesting vegetation without a permit.
- Anacostia Park
Look but don’t pick: a NACE gathering site, but this item is not on the compendium’s list.
- Huntley Meadows Park
Look but don’t pick: Fairfax County parks ban removing any plant part without written permission.
Most-logged places: what this means
The places with the most research-grade iNaturalist sightings within 25 km of downtown DC (re-counted in October 2026 over every named place, campuses, condominiums and private grounds included), each marked legal to pick or not. A sighting inside several named places counts once, for the smallest of them, but a sighting inside a National Park Service park never counts for a private, campus or unchecked place. iNaturalist shows where people walk and log plants, not true abundance. Private campuses, condominiums, museums, estates and utility land (Pepco’s power-line land near Sligo Creek) are marked “no” (pick only with the owner’s permission); public university campuses, city parks and other places whose picking rules were not checked (county stormwater land, the U.S. Capitol Grounds, Greenbelt’s North Woods, federal facilities such as the National Zoo) are “unknown”. A place needs at least 2 sightings, so plants with very few sightings (rugosa rose) have no places. No most-logged places are named for at-risk plants (ramps, chinquapin, American chestnut); chinquapin’s page names Mason Neck State Park, where picking is legal, and asks you to leave most nuts. For some places, mostly Rock Creek Park, the iNaturalist map shows more sightings than the count here, because a map link cannot leave out exactly the sightings credited to another place. iNaturalist is a website and phone app where people post photos of the plants and animals they see. A sighting is “research grade” when other users have confirmed what it is; “needs ID” sightings are not confirmed yet, and “cultivated” ones are marked as planted.
Where you may pick
On National Park Service land around DC (Rock Creek Park and other NPS units) gathering leaves, flowers, roots or other non-fruit plant parts is prohibited, because 36 CFR 2.1(c) lets a park designate only fruits, berries and nuts; Rock Creek’s compendium also bars gathering fruits, nuts, berries, seeds, mushrooms or cut greenery. Get permission before picking in county or regional parks or on private land.
- (no listed park)
Private land with the owner’s permission only
Where you may pick: what this means
For each park system: “yes” where its current rules (the park’s compendium or regulation) allow this plant or part, with the limit; “ambiguous” where the wording may or may not cover it, so ask the park; “no” where it is not allowed. Rock Creek Park, the GW Parkway sites (including Great Falls VA and Theodore Roosevelt Island), the National Mall, Montgomery and Prince George’s parks, Maryland state parks, and Fairfax and Arlington parks prohibit picking. Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts allows blackberries and raspberries (one gallon per person per day) and chestnuts (one gallon per person per day). National Park Service rules are reissued every year; other parks change theirs from time to time, so check the park’s current rules. The Where you may pick page has every park’s rules.
Ways to use it
- very young leaves raw in salads
- potherb, cooked in one or more changes of water to tone down bitterness
- mixed with milder greens
- flowers raw in salads
Keeping
Use within a few days, or blanch and freeze for cooking.
- Use within
- within a few days
- Keeps fresh
- A few days refrigerated in a perforated bag (general guidance for leafy greens); bitterness increases with age.
- Keeping basis
- general guidance for its type
Ways to keep it
Freeze as researched: blanch & freeze; canning: n/a (not shelf-canned)
NCHFP: water-blanch 2 minutes (collards 3), cool, drain, pack with 1/2-inch headspace. Frozen greens are for cooked dishes only. Greens are low-acid and may only be pressure-canned, never water-bath canned, so freezing is the practical home method. Blanching also tames bitterness; for the cooked potherb use only.
Canning: what this means
Shelf-stable canning, three levels. Lab-tested: a lab-tested recipe from the National Center for Home Food Preservation (NCHFP) or Oregon State covers this fruit and product, or a generic recipe for its kind (the line says so, for example chokeberry). Extension recipe: a published Extension recipe (University of Alaska Fairbanks, written for Alaska species; University of Maine’s dandelion jelly), or a process that is safe only with a pH meter; follow it exactly, never improvise. No tested recipe: refrigerate or freeze, don’t can. “Hot-bottled syrup” = maple and walnut syrup, which keep when bottled hot at full syrup density. The Canning line names the exact product each source covers, for example “whole berries” or “juice”; a product not named there (such as juice from a berry with only a whole-berry recipe) has no tested recipe.
Keeping basis: what this means
“Specific to this plant” or “general guidance for its type” (for example NCHFP guidance for leafy greens applied to a wild green).
Nutrition
How much of a day’s needs one standard serving (85 g) provides, using the FDA’s daily values and serving sizes. The FDA calls 20% or more “high” and 10–19% a “good source”. Every figure below is listed with its source; where the sources disagree, all of them are shown and no conclusion is drawn.
Vitamin A: high
Fratianni et al. 2024: 43% of daily value
Sample: Cichorium intybus, WILD, basal leaves collected in spring 2021 in Molise (Ripalimosani) and Campania (Circello), southern Italy; at least 1 kg gathered; raw leaves stored at -20 °C before analysis; 3 biological samples each analyzed in triplicate
Recorded: Beta-carotene (all-trans β-carotene; 9-cis 0.9 and 13-cis 0.1 listed separately) 4.7 mg/100 g f.w.; Alpha-carotene 0.6 mg/100 g f.w.; Beta-cryptoxanthin 0.8 mg/100 g f.w. (per 100 g fresh weight, raw basal leaves). Working: 450 µg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 382.5 µg; daily value 900 µg; 43%.
Jančić et al. 2017: 44% and 58% of daily value (2 figures in this study)
Recorded: 5.6 mg (per 100 g fresh weight (pigment table, mg/100 g FW)). Sample: Cichorium intybus, wild ('samonikle'), young juicy rosette leaves before the flowering stem forms, collected early in the morning in meadows away from roads, May-June 2014, 2015 and 2016, at seven sites in Montenegro (Zoganje, Risan, Podgor, Tivat, Pričelje, Plavnica, Pljevlja); composite samples (~2 kg from 6-10 microsites); value is the average of the seven wild sites (same samples as the thesis) Working: 466.667 µg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 396.667 µg; daily value 900 µg; 44%.
Recorded: 7.4 mg (per 100 g fresh weight). Sample: Cichorium intybus, cultivated in the only two greenhouses growing it in Montenegro (Komani, Šušanj); value is the mean of the two; leaf type of the cultivated chicory not stated Working: 616.667 µg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 524.167 µg; daily value 900 µg; 58%.
Manganese: the analyses differ
Ceccanti et al. 2021: 26% of daily value
Sample: Cichorium intybus, WILD-collected (row 'W'), Pisa area, Italy; youngest leaves of the basal rosette cut before flowering; leaves pooled and oven-dried at 65 °C for analysis, results expressed per fresh weight; 3 replicates; leaf dry matter 10.3 ± 1.0 % (Table 1)
Recorded: 7.07 μg g−1 FW (per gram fresh weight). Working: 0.707 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 0.6009 mg; daily value 2.3 mg; 26%.
Jančić et al. 2017: 23% and 11% of daily value (2 figures in this study)
Recorded: 0.61 mg (per 100 g fresh leaves (table footnote: 'rezultati su prikazani na 100 g svježeg uzorka')). Sample: Cichorium intybus, wild ('samonikle'), young juicy rosette leaves before the flowering stem forms, collected early in the morning in meadows away from roads, May-June 2014, 2015 and 2016, at seven sites in Montenegro (Zoganje, Risan, Podgor, Tivat, Pričelje, Plavnica, Pljevlja); composite samples (~2 kg from 6-10 microsites); value is the mean of the seven wild sites Working: 0.61 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 0.5185 mg; daily value 2.3 mg; 23%.
Recorded: 0.31 mg (per 100 g fresh leaves (table footnote: 'rezultati su prikazani na 100 g svježeg uzorka')). Sample: Cichorium intybus, cultivated in the only two greenhouses growing it in Montenegro (Komani, Šušanj); value is the mean of the two; leaf type of the cultivated chicory not stated Working: 0.31 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 0.2635 mg; daily value 2.3 mg; 11%.
Vitamin C: the analyses differ
USDA SR Legacy: 23% of daily value
Sample: Cichorium intybus (USDA’s scientific name); 'Chicory greens, raw'; refuse 18% ('Tough stems and damaged leaves'); wild or cultivated, leaf age, origin not documented (values dated 08/1984, Agriculture Handbook 8-11 era); each analyzed value rests on one analysis
Recorded: 24.0 mg (per 100 g edible portion, raw). Working: 24 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 20.4 mg; daily value 90 mg; 23%.
Jančić et al. 2017: 4% and 3% of daily value (2 figures in this study)
Recorded: 4.0 mg (per 100 g fresh leaves (table footnote: 'rezultati su prikazani na 100 g svježeg uzorka')). Sample: Cichorium intybus, wild ('samonikle'), young juicy rosette leaves before the flowering stem forms, collected early in the morning in meadows away from roads, May-June 2014, 2015 and 2016, at seven sites in Montenegro (Zoganje, Risan, Podgor, Tivat, Pričelje, Plavnica, Pljevlja); composite samples (~2 kg from 6-10 microsites); value is the mean of the seven wild sites Working: 4 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 3.4 mg; daily value 90 mg; 4%.
Recorded: 3.5 mg (per 100 g fresh leaves (table footnote: 'rezultati su prikazani na 100 g svježeg uzorka')). Sample: Cichorium intybus, cultivated in the only two greenhouses growing it in Montenegro (Komani, Šušanj); value is the mean of the two; leaf type of the cultivated chicory not stated Working: 3.5 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 2.975 mg; daily value 90 mg; 3%.
Dietary fiber: good source
Jančić et al. 2017: 13% and 11% of daily value (2 figures in this study)
Recorded: 4.2 g (per 100 g fresh weight (Table 2 footnote: data are expressed on 100 g fresh weight)). Sample: Cichorium intybus, wild ('samonikle'), young juicy rosette leaves before the flowering stem forms, collected early in the morning in meadows away from roads, May-June 2014, 2015 and 2016, at seven sites in Montenegro (Zoganje, Risan, Podgor, Tivat, Pričelje, Plavnica, Pljevlja); composite samples (~2 kg from 6-10 microsites); value is the average of the seven wild sites (same samples as the thesis) Working: 4.2 g per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 3.57 g; daily value 28 g; 13%.
Recorded: 3.6 g (per 100 g fresh weight). Sample: Cichorium intybus, cultivated in the only two greenhouses growing it in Montenegro (Komani, Šušanj); value is the mean of the two; leaf type of the cultivated chicory not stated Working: 3.6 g per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 3.06 g; daily value 28 g; 11%.
Vitamin E: good source
Fratianni et al. 2024: 13% of daily value
Sample: Cichorium intybus, WILD, basal leaves collected in spring 2021 in Molise (Ripalimosani) and Campania (Circello), southern Italy; at least 1 kg gathered; raw leaves stored at -20 °C before analysis; 3 biological samples each analyzed in triplicate
Recorded: 2.3 mg/100 g f.w. (per 100 g fresh weight, raw basal leaves). Working: 2.3 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 1.955 mg; daily value 15 mg; 13%.
Calcium: the analyses differ
USDA SR Legacy: 7% of daily value
Sample: Cichorium intybus (USDA’s scientific name); 'Chicory greens, raw'; refuse 18% ('Tough stems and damaged leaves'); wild or cultivated, leaf age, origin not documented (values dated 08/1984, Agriculture Handbook 8-11 era); each analyzed value rests on one analysis
Recorded: 100 mg (per 100 g edible portion, raw). Working: 100 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 85 mg; daily value 1300 mg; 7%.
Fratianni et al. 2024: 5% of daily value
Sample: Cichorium intybus, WILD, basal leaves collected in spring 2021 in Molise (Ripalimosani) and Campania (Circello), southern Italy; at least 1 kg gathered; raw leaves stored at -20 °C before analysis; 3 biological samples each analyzed in triplicate
Recorded: 69.4 mg/100 g f.w. (per 100 g fresh weight, raw basal leaves). Working: 69.4 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 58.99 mg; daily value 1300 mg; 5%.
Ceccanti et al. 2021: 9% of daily value
Sample: Cichorium intybus, WILD-collected (row 'W'), Pisa area, Italy; youngest leaves of the basal rosette cut before flowering; leaves pooled and oven-dried at 65 °C for analysis, results expressed per fresh weight; 3 replicates; leaf dry matter 10.3 ± 1.0 % (Table 1)
Recorded: 1.32 mg g−1 FW (per gram fresh weight). Working: 132 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 112.2 mg; daily value 1300 mg; 9%.
Jančić et al. 2017: 12% and 5% of daily value (2 figures in this study)
Recorded: 189 mg (per 100 g fresh leaves (table footnote: 'rezultati su prikazani na 100 g svježeg uzorka')). Sample: Cichorium intybus, wild ('samonikle'), young juicy rosette leaves before the flowering stem forms, collected early in the morning in meadows away from roads, May-June 2014, 2015 and 2016, at seven sites in Montenegro (Zoganje, Risan, Podgor, Tivat, Pričelje, Plavnica, Pljevlja); composite samples (~2 kg from 6-10 microsites); value is the mean of the seven wild sites Working: 189 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 160.65 mg; daily value 1300 mg; 12%.
Recorded: 80 mg (per 100 g fresh leaves (table footnote: 'rezultati su prikazani na 100 g svježeg uzorka')). Sample: Cichorium intybus, cultivated in the only two greenhouses growing it in Montenegro (Komani, Šušanj); value is the mean of the two; leaf type of the cultivated chicory not stated Working: 80 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 68 mg; daily value 1300 mg; 5%.
Iron: the analyses differ
USDA SR Legacy: 4% of daily value
Sample: Cichorium intybus (USDA’s scientific name); 'Chicory greens, raw'; refuse 18% ('Tough stems and damaged leaves'); wild or cultivated, leaf age, origin not documented (values dated 08/1984, Agriculture Handbook 8-11 era); each analyzed value rests on one analysis
Recorded: 0.90 mg (per 100 g edible portion, raw). Working: 0.9 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 0.765 mg; daily value 18 mg; 4%.
Fratianni et al. 2024: 3% of daily value
Sample: Cichorium intybus, WILD, basal leaves collected in spring 2021 in Molise (Ripalimosani) and Campania (Circello), southern Italy; at least 1 kg gathered; raw leaves stored at -20 °C before analysis; 3 biological samples each analyzed in triplicate
Recorded: 0.6 mg/100 g f.w. (per 100 g fresh weight, raw basal leaves). Working: 0.6 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 0.51 mg; daily value 18 mg; 3%.
Ceccanti et al. 2021: 12% of daily value
Sample: Cichorium intybus, WILD-collected (row 'W'), Pisa area, Italy; youngest leaves of the basal rosette cut before flowering; leaves pooled and oven-dried at 65 °C for analysis, results expressed per fresh weight; 3 replicates; leaf dry matter 10.3 ± 1.0 % (Table 1)
Recorded: 24.62 μg g−1 FW (per gram fresh weight). Working: 2.462 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 2.0927 mg; daily value 18 mg; 12%.
Jančić et al. 2017: 12% and 8% of daily value (2 figures in this study)
Recorded: 2.51 mg (per 100 g fresh leaves (table footnote: 'rezultati su prikazani na 100 g svježeg uzorka')). Sample: Cichorium intybus, wild ('samonikle'), young juicy rosette leaves before the flowering stem forms, collected early in the morning in meadows away from roads, May-June 2014, 2015 and 2016, at seven sites in Montenegro (Zoganje, Risan, Podgor, Tivat, Pričelje, Plavnica, Pljevlja); composite samples (~2 kg from 6-10 microsites); value is the mean of the seven wild sites Working: 2.51 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 2.1335 mg; daily value 18 mg; 12%.
Recorded: 1.7 mg (per 100 g fresh leaves (table footnote: 'rezultati su prikazani na 100 g svježeg uzorka')). Sample: Cichorium intybus, cultivated in the only two greenhouses growing it in Montenegro (Komani, Šušanj); value is the mean of the two; leaf type of the cultivated chicory not stated Working: 1.7 mg per 100 g × 85 g ÷ 100 = 1.445 mg; daily value 18 mg; 8%.
Other figures, each under 10% of daily value (14)
- Ceccanti et al. 2021: Magnesium 2%; Potassium 7%; Zinc 5%
- Fratianni et al. 2024: Magnesium 6%; Potassium 3%; Zinc 4%
- Jančić et al. 2017: Magnesium 6%, 4%; Potassium 7%, 6%; Zinc 6%, 2%
- USDA SR Legacy: Magnesium 6%; Potassium 8%
Figures left out, and why (15 studies; 12 with no figure used)
- USDA SR Legacy (other figures from this study are used above): carbohydrate has an FDA daily value, but the panels show only vitamins, minerals and dietary fiber; no FDA daily value; not measured in the cited work: USDA marks it 'Calculated or imputed'; 0 data points (imputed or calculated by USDA, not an analytical value); not measured in the cited work: USDA marks it 'Calculated or imputed'; USDA notes 'Nutrient that is based on other nutrient/s; calculated rather than analyzed'; 0 data points; protein: the FDA percent daily value for protein must be corrected for protein quality (PDCAAS, 21 CFR 101.9(c)(7)(ii)), which this analysis does not report; species, part or state not clear: exact species, but the part is the forced witloof head (chicon), not the young green basal leaves the dataset means; total fat has an FDA daily value, but the panels show only vitamins, minerals and dietary fiber
- Ceccanti et al. 2021 (other figures from this study are used above): no FDA daily value
- Vasilišin et al. 2024: dry or dried basis: per 100 g leaves (the paper writes mg/100g; fresh basis inferred by AI: moisture was measured on fresh leaves and results are not said to be on dry weight)
- D’Evoli et al. 2017: protein: the FDA percent daily value for protein must be corrected for protein quality (PDCAAS, 21 CFR 101.9(c)(7)(ii)), which this analysis does not report; species, part or state not clear: exact species, but the part is the blanched (Late: forced) head of a cultivated radicchio, not the young green basal leaves the dataset means; total fat has an FDA daily value, but the panels show only vitamins, minerals and dietary fiber
- Ö. & Yalçın 2007: basis not clear: percent of plant material dried at 70 °C (basis not stated; dry-weight basis inferred by AI from the method); protein = N x 6.25; not measured in the cited work: derived (N measured, protein = N x 6.25); protein: the FDA percent daily value for protein must be corrected for protein quality (PDCAAS, 21 CFR 101.9(c)(7)(ii)), which this analysis does not report
- Dimitrijević et al. 2024: dry or dried basis: dry weight; flagged implausible; species, part or state not clear: exact species, but the part is a commercial radicchio head, not the young green basal leaves the dataset means
- Golubkina et al. 2019: dry or dried basis: dry weight; dry or dried basis: per 100 g dry weight; no FDA daily value; species, part or state not clear: exact species, but the part is leaves of a forced witloof-type head, not the young green basal leaves the dataset means
- Balah & Hozyan 2022: basis not clear: '%(g/100 g)' as printed in Table 2; fresh or dry basis not stated (analyses were on dried powder; the low values suggest a fresh-weight expression, but this is not stated); carbohydrate has an FDA daily value, but the panels show only vitamins, minerals and dietary fiber; crude fiber is a different measure from dietary fiber, the FDA daily value is for dietary fiber; dry or dried basis: per 100 g dry matter; dry or dried basis: per 100 g dry matter (text: minerals quantified in dry matter, Table 4); no FDA daily value; not measured in the cited work: derived (calculated from carbohydrate, lipid and protein); protein: the FDA percent daily value for protein must be corrected for protein quality (PDCAAS, 21 CFR 101.9(c)(7)(ii)), which this analysis does not report; total fat has an FDA daily value, but the panels show only vitamins, minerals and dietary fiber
- Umarova & Ibragimov 2026: basis not clear: basis not stated (fresh or dried leaf not stated); flagged implausible; species, part or state not clear: exact species and leaves, but the sample (origin, stage, fresh or dried) is not described
- Kaya & Nemli 2004: basis not clear: per 100 g (Table 3 heading mg/100g; analyses on dried samples, so a dry basis is likely but not stated); dry or dried basis: per 100 g edible portion as analyzed; Table 2 footnote says analyses were on dried samples (dry basis inferred by AI); protein: the FDA percent daily value for protein must be corrected for protein quality (PDCAAS, 21 CFR 101.9(c)(7)(ii)), which this analysis does not report; species, part or state not clear: exact species, wild, but the edible portion bought at market is not described (leaves presumed)
- Renna et al. 2015: dry or dried basis: dry weight
- Volpe et al. 2015: dry or dried basis: dry weight; dry or dried basis: dry weight (Table 1 heading g kg−1 dry weight; the text gives the same values in mg kg−1)
- Jančić et al. 2017 (other figures from this study are used above): no FDA daily value; not measured in the cited work: derived; not measured in the cited work: derived (by difference); not measured in the cited work: derived (by difference, as described in the methods); not measured in the cited work: derived (protein and carbohydrate x 4, fat x 9); protein: the FDA percent daily value for protein must be corrected for protein quality (PDCAAS, 21 CFR 101.9(c)(7)(ii)), which this analysis does not report; total fat has an FDA daily value, but the panels show only vitamins, minerals and dietary fiber
- Fratianni et al. 2021: dry or dried basis: per 100 g dry matter, boiled 10 min; dry or dried basis: per 100 g dry matter, raw; dry or dried basis: per 100 g dry matter, steamed 10 min; species, part or state not clear: exact species and leaves, but a commercial chicory of unstated type, not wild young basal leaves
- Francis et al. 2014: species, part or state not clear: exact species and leaves, but cultivated leaf-chicory bunches of unstated leaf age rather than young wild basal leaves
What was searched
- Europe PMC: searched 2026-10-09, 581 records; 563 after removing duplicates across databases; 11 candidates by title and abstract; 5 read in full; 4 with figures used
- PubMed: searched 2026-10-09, 264 records; 264 after removing duplicates across databases; 6 candidates by title and abstract; 4 read in full; 3 with figures used
- OpenAlex: searched 2026-10-09, 1660 records; 1638 after removing duplicates across databases; 46 candidates by title and abstract; 21 read in full; 14 with figures used
- Crossref: searched 2026-10-09, 100 records; 99 after removing duplicates across databases; 4 candidates by title and abstract; 3 read in full; 1 with figures used
- J-STAGE (Japan): searched 2026-10-09, 158 records; 155 after removing duplicates across databases; 0 candidates by title and abstract; 0 read in full; 0 with figures used
- USDA FoodData Central (online search): searched 2026-10-09, 8 records; 8 after removing duplicates across databases; 1 candidates by title and abstract; 1 read in full; 1 with figures used
- USDA FoodData Central (downloaded SR Legacy 2018 and Foundation 2026 tables): searched 2026-10-09, 5 records; 5 after removing duplicates across databases; 1 candidates by title and abstract; 1 read in full; 1 with figures used
- All databases together: 2776 records from all databases, 2068 unique, 48 candidates, 23 read, 15 used; 25 not read (paywalled 6, blocked automated access 10, not online 9)
- KCI (Korea), CNKI (China), SciELO (Latin America), CORE, USDA’s AGRICOLA and PubAg, Google Scholar, and national food composition tables other than USDA’s: not searched (October 2026).
The counts are of papers new in this search. Sources found before this search (such as USDA’s entries) were not counted again.
Each database was searched for the plant’s scientific and common names together with nutrient words (composition, nutrient, vitamin, mineral, fiber, protein and others), in titles and abstracts only. Papers that don’t name the plant there, and words not on the list (such as fat, energy and moisture), were missed unless another paper led to them; the AI researchers found some that way.
Found but not read (25)
- Analysis of nutrient components and nitrate safety risk of common edible stemmy and leafy vegetables in Shanghai ZHANG Junhui, YANG Xudong, CUI Wen, Jin Minfeng 2025; not read: not online
- Antioxidants in Varieties of Chicory ( Cichorium intybus L.) and Wild Poppy ( Papaver rhoeas L.) of Southern Italy Anna Montefusco, Giuliana Semitaio, Pier Paolo Marrese, Andrea Iurlaro, Monica De Caroli, Gabriella Piro, Giuseppe Dalessandro, Marcello Salvatore Lenucci 2015; not read: the site blocked automated access
- Carotenoid and chlorophyll composition of commonly consumed leafy vegetables in Mediterranean countries. Dragan Žnidarčić, Dean Ban, Helena Šircelj 2011; not read: paywalled
- CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF CICHORIUM INTYBUS AND PORTULACA OLERACEA VARIETY GROWN IN EGYPT S. A. El- Kodosy, Sh. N. Draz, Samia M. Khalil, Sh. R. Mosa 2021; not read: the site blocked automated access
- Chemical Composition and Benefiting of Some Wild Edible Plants Ahmed Khalifa, Soumia Darwish, Fathia Abo Zeid, MacTar A. Mohamed 2022; not read: the site blocked automated access
- EFFECT OF SPECIES AND VARIETY ON THE CONTENT OF MACROELEMENTS AND MICRONUTRIENTS IN LETTUCE Branka Lazic, Sanja D. Lazić, Petar Sekulić 2002; not read: paywalled
- Effects of microwave cooking on carotenoids, phenolic compounds and antioxidant activity of Cichorium intybus L. (chicory) leaves Alam Zeb, Anisul Haq, Michael Murkovic 2019; not read: paywalled
- Fatty acids profiles of some Spanish wild vegetables. Patrícia Morales, ICFR Ferreira, Ana Maria Carvalho, María de Cortes Sánchez‐Mata, Montaña Cámara, Javier Tardío 2012; not read: the site blocked automated access
- First determination of mineral composition of the leaf Chicory (Cichorium intybus L.) used in human nourishment in the Midwest of Brazil and comparasion with dietary reference intakes for children and adults Rafaela Henriques Rosa, Andre Henrique de Oliveira Lopes, Valter Aragão do Nascimento, Ana Lúcia Alves de Arruda, Igor Domingos de Souza, Anderson Fernandes da Silva, Marcos Antônio Ferreira Júnior 2017; not read: not online
- Investigation of macro and micro-nutrients in selected medicinal plants Riaz Ullah 2012; not read: the site blocked automated access
- Lipophilic antioxidants in edible weeds from agricultural areas Helena Šircelj, Maja Mikulič-Petkovšek, Robert Veberič, M. Hudina, Ana Slatnar 2018; not read: the site blocked automated access
- Macro- and microelement composition of Cichorium intybus L. from Uzbekistan J Tadjiyev, R.Sh. Shukrullozoda, Khislat Khaydarov, Zebiniso Umurzakova, Shaxzod Turabekov, B.M. Bazarov, Markhamat Ismayilova, Xolbekov Baxodir 2026; not read: not online
- Mediterranean non-cultivated vegetables as dietary sources of compounds with antioxidant and biological activity Patrícia Morales, Isabel C.F.R. Ferreira, Ana Maria Carvalho, María de Cortes Sánchez‐Mata, Montaña Cámara, Virginia Fernández‐Ruiz, Manuel Pardo‐de‐Santayana, Javier Tardío 2014; not read: the site blocked automated access
- Metabolomic profiling of the nutritional components of chicory leaves following heat processing. Wataru Kobayashi, Ayumi Tomizawa, Misaki Kurawaka, Masako Abe, Akio Watanabe, Sonoko Ayabe 2024; not read: the site blocked automated access
- Nutrient composition of six wild edible Mediterranean Asteraceae plants of dietary interest Patricia García‐Herrera, María de Cortes Sánchez‐Mata, Montaña Cámara, Virginia Fernández‐Ruiz, Carmen Díez-Marqués, M. Molina, Javier Tardío 2014; not read: paywalled
- Nutritional analysis, micronutrients and chlorophyll contents of Cichorium intybus L. Jan Gul, MirAjab Kahan, Mushtaq Ahmad, Zafar Iqbal, Aftab Afzal, Muhammad Afzal, Ghulam Mujtaba Shah, Abdul Majid 2011; not read: not online
- Nutritional value, bioactive compounds and antioxidant activities of wild chicory (Cichorium intybus L.) from Turkey Uğur BAŞARAN, Medine ÇOPUR DOĞRUSÖZ, Cennet Yaman, Erdem GÜLÜMSER, Hanife Mut 2021; not read: paywalled
- Plantas silvestres de consumo tradicional en España: caracterización de su valor nutricional y estimación de su actividad antifúngica Patricia García‐Herrera 2014; not read: not online
- Qualitative characterisation of cultivated and wild edible plants: Mineral elements, phenols content and antioxidant capacity Grazia Disciglio, Annalisa Tarantino, Laura Frabboni, Anna Gagliardi, Marcella Michela Giuliani, Emanuele Tarantino, Giuseppe Gatta 2017; not read: the site blocked automated access
- Raw and Cooked Green Leafy Vegetables as a Good Source of Carotenoids, Vitamin a and Vitamin E Alessandra Fratianni, Giuseppe Ianiri, Caroline Vitone, Serena Niro, Gianfranco Panfili 2023; not read: the site blocked automated access
- Seasonal and environmental variability of non-cultivated edible Cichorioideae (Asteraceae) Mariangela Marrelli, Filomena Conforti, Fabrizio Araniti, Teresa Casacchia, Giancarlo Antonio Statti 2017; not read: paywalled
- Sensory and biochemical evaluation of raw and processed chicory : Hindbeh (Cichorium intybus) during frozen storage - by Francine Joseph Francis. Francine Joseph. Francis 2012; not read: not online
- Studies on phytochemicals, nutritional parameters and antioxidant potential of Chicory (Cichorium intybus L.) and Garden cress (Lepidium sativum L.) Satya Shree Jangra 2018; not read: not online
- Study on Nutritional Components of Wild Cichorium intybus Linn. Niu Peng-fei 2012; not read: not online
- USABILITY OF DIFFERENT TYPES AND CULTIVARS OF SALAD CHICORY (Cichorium intybus L. var. foliosum (Hegi) Bish.) FOR SPRING CULTIVATION Anita BIESIADA, Anna Tomczak 2012; not read: not online
Collected in October 2026 by AI research agents, following written rules; the calendar’s figures were then checked independently.
Native or not
- Origin
- non-native
- Native range
- Europe
- Virginia invasive rank
- not listed
- Maryland invasive status
- not listed
Native or not, and the invader stars: what this means
Origin is where the plant comes from: native, non-native, or mixed (the harvest covers both). The stars rate plants on invasive plant lists: ★★★ Virginia DCR “High” or Maryland prohibited invasive · ★★ Virginia “Medium” · ★ Virginia “Low” · ☆ listed only by the Maryland Invasive Species Council or the Mid-Atlantic Plant Invaders guide (advisory) · no stars: native or not listed.
Virginia DCR, Virginia Invasive Plant Species List (effective September 2024), verbatim: "Under the DCR Invasive Species Assessment Protocol, approved by the Virginia Invasive Species Working Group, January 2024, species were ranked as exhibiting high, medium or low levels of invasiveness based on their threat to natural communities and native species. Invasiveness rank is higher for species that: • Alter ecosystem processes, such as succession, hydrology or fire regime. • Are capable of invading undisturbed natural communities. • Cause substantial impacts on rare or vulnerable species or natural communities or high-quality examples of more common communities. • Are found widely distributed and generally abundant where present. • Disperse readily to new areas. • Are difficult to control." The list also states: "The list is for educational purposes only and has no regulatory authority."
Maryland Department of Agriculture, Maryland Prohibited Invasive Plant Law and Regulations page, verbatim: "Plants on the Maryland Prohibited Invasive Plant List may not be added to stock after the effective date and should not be sold after their phase-out period ends."
No official DC invasive plant list was found.
How the ratings were set
- Find
- Everywhere Estimate 1,779 = 1,745 research-grade iNaturalist sightings within 25 km + 23 needs-ID sightings counted in full (chicory is the only Cichorium with research-grade sightings here) + 11 'cultivated' (planted) sightings (rule A); that is tier 1 by count (rule B). Rule C (everyday place) is met: the Digital Atlas of the Virginia Flora gives its habitat as "Fields, pastures, roadsides, clearings, gardens, waste ground, and other open weedy habitats" and says "Common throughout, except in the se. Coastal Plain". Final tier 1.
- Effort
- Grab & eat Rinse young basal leaves and use raw as a bitter salad green; cooking in changes of water to cut bitterness is a 2.
Find: what this means
1 Everywhere · 2 Common in the right habitat · 3 Patchy · 4 Elusive. This is about how much there is, not whether you may pick it. It is based on iNaturalist sightings within 25 km (about 15 miles) of downtown DC, counted on October 3, 2026. The four rules that each plant’s “Find” reason refers to: (A) the estimate is the confirmed sightings, plus the unconfirmed ones (scaled down where the plant has lookalikes in its genus), plus the sightings marked as planted; (B) the tier by estimate: 1,500 or more is tier 1, 250–1,499 tier 2, 50–249 tier 3, under 50 tier 4; (C) tier 1, Everywhere, also needs a source saying the plant is common in lawns, sidewalks, yards or gardens, vacant lots or towns, or at least one DC street tree of it per km of sidewalk, otherwise it is tier 2; (D) if a reliable source says the plant is rare in this region, or that wild plants rarely bear the harvest, only planted sightings count. iNaturalist is a website and phone app where people post photos of the plants and animals they see. A sighting is “research grade” when other users have confirmed what it is; “needs ID” sightings are not confirmed yet, and “cultivated” ones are marked as planted.
Effort: what this means
1 Grab & eat · 2 Quick kitchen prep (under about 30 minutes) · 3 Real work (hours, or cooking needed for safety) · 4 Project (days or equipment). Scored on the simplest worthwhile use; each plant’s page says why.
Sources
17 sources, each linked to the original.
- Rock Creek Park Superintendent’s Compendium National Park ServiceBacks up: picking rules
- Cichorium intybus (Chicory) NC State Extension Gardener Plant ToolboxBacks up: description, uses, habitat, native or invasive status
- iNaturalist research-grade observations of Cichorium intybus within 25 km of downtown DC iNaturalistBacks up: findability
- Cichorium intybus (Chicory) (Digital Atlas of the Virginia Flora) Virginia Botanical Associates (Digital Atlas of the Virginia Flora)Backs up: habitat
- Bulletin #4180, Vegetables and Fruits for Health: Greens University of Maine Cooperative ExtensionBacks up: keeping
- Freezing Greens (Including Spinach) National Center for Home Food Preservation (University of Georgia)Backs up: keeping
- Got the Wintertime “Greens”? National Center for Home Food Preservation (University of Georgia)Backs up: keeping
- USDA PLANTS Database: Cichorium intybus (CIIN), native status USDA NRCSBacks up: native or invasive status
- Virginia Invasive Plant Species List (effective date: September 2024) Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural HeritageBacks up: native or invasive status
- Maryland Prohibited Invasive Plant Law and Regulations (Maryland Prohibited Invasive Plant List, updated January 2026; additions effective July 15, 2026; 'Next Plants To Be Assessed' 2026-2027) Maryland Department of Agriculture, Plant Protection & Weed ManagementBacks up: native or invasive status
- Non-Native Invasive Terrestrial Plant Species in the State of Maryland (updates approved through the April 18, 2024 MISC meeting) Maryland Invasive Species CouncilBacks up: native or invasive status
- Plant Invaders of Mid-Atlantic Natural Areas, Field Guide (Swearingen & Fulton, 2022; successor to the NPS/USFWS 5th ed., 2017) Mid-Atlantic Invasive Plant Council / Passiflora Press (hosted by Bugwood/Mid-Atlantic Invaders Tool)Backs up: native or invasive status
- Invasive Plants in the District DC Department of Energy & EnvironmentBacks up: native or invasive status
- Taraxacum officinale (Dandelion) NC State Extension Gardener Plant ToolboxBacks up: safety details
- iNaturalist research-grade observations of Cichorium intybus within 25 km of Washington, DC, by month (flowering) iNaturalistBacks up: season
- Wild Edibles of Missouri (Jan Phillips, 2nd ed.) Missouri Department of ConservationBacks up: season, uses, description
- Common Chicory (field guide) Missouri Department of ConservationBacks up: uses, habitat, description