Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 208

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Some thoughts about weeds

Open access
Harlan, Jack R., de Wet, J. M. J.·1965·Economic Botany

Abstract

The word "weed" comes to us from Middle English and has Flemish, Frisian, and AngloSaxon roots. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) says that "the ulterior etymology is unknown." The word appears in English literature at least by the time of Alfred in the 9th Century. The early usage appears to be comipatible with the first definition given by the Oxford English Dictionary: "Weed 1. A herbaceous plant not valued for use or beauty, growing wild and rank, and regarded as cumbering the ground or hindering the growth of superior vegetation." It should be pointed out that another word, "weed," meaning clothing, garb, armour, or covering (e.g., "widow's weeds") has a different etymology and comes from Teutonic and Scandinavian roots.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf02971181

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 208

Metadata

Authors
Harlan, J. R., & de Wet, J. M. J.
Venue
Economic Botany
Published
1965-01
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
16-24
ISSN
  • 0013-0001 (ISSN-L)
  • 1874-9364
OpenAlex
W2090965855
Cited by
208
References
0
FWCI
3.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Some thoughts about weeds. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/bf02971181
The paper
Harlan, J. R., & de Wet, J. M. J. (1965). Some thoughts about weeds. Economic Botany. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02971181

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.