Aim: To have a comprehensive review on classification, good collection practices, number, importance, adverse effects, possible botanical identity, and different indications of classical vegetables from 15 different classical texts and lexicons and to present them in a systemic manner.

Background: Vegetables are an integral part of healthy diet since the Vedic era. For the past few decades, there is a growing interest in assessing the role of vegetables for their health benefits. In various classical texts of Ayurveda, all the vegetables are detailed under a single group termed as œakavarga where the properties and indication of individual plant were described. Authors of classical texts of Ayurveda described the nutritional as well as therapeutic value of all the vegetables in their respective texts. These information have not been critically reviewed and published in a compiled format. A systematic review regarding the identification and use of these classical vegetables is the need of the time.

Review results: Analysis of data reveals that about 308 œakadravya (vegetables) are described in classical texts. Among them, 156 patraśāka (leafy vegetables), 71 phalaśāka (fruit vegetables), 50 kandaśāka (tuber/root), 30 puspaśāka (flower vegetables), 10 nālaśāka (stem/aerial parts), and one type of sam.svedaja śāka (mushrooms) are described.

Conclusion: Vegetables described under śākavarga in classical texts of Ayurveda can be further studied to understand the mechanism of action to establish their dietetic importance.

Clinical significance: These vegetables are indicated in 42 different disease conditions where they can be used as pathya (wholesome diet). Some contraindications and precautions to be taken during collection and preparations of the œakadravya are also explained in many of the classical texts.

Keywords: Āhāra, Nutraceuticals, Pathya, Śākavarga, Vegetables.

How to cite this article: Naik R, Borkar SD, Acharya R. A Comprehensive Review on Śākavarga-group of Vegetables from Classical Texts of Ayurveda. J Drug Res Ayurvedic Sci 2017;2(2):91-103.

Source of support: Nil

Conflict of interest: None