Compare two different foods side-by-side by nutrients, energy, and quality scores.
The CSV contains energy and nutrients per 100 g for these two records only. Missing measurements remain blank rather than zero. Model scores and personal health conclusions are not exported.
Share your experiences or ask your questions.
Energy
49 kcal
Score
88 / 100
Çemen otu yaprağı has a higher nutrition quality score (88) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
315 vs 49(-84.4%)
Score Diff
76 vs 88(+15.8%)
OVERALL WINNER
Çemen otu yaprağı
Higher energy
Adaçayı (Kuru)
Score leader
Çemen otu yaprağı
Nutrient split
17 - 3 (tie: 0)
This chart shows energy per 100 g for both foods.
Each axis is normalized to 0-100; the outer shape indicates relative dominance on that nutrient.
Green/blue bars indicate first food advantage, orange bars indicate second food advantage.
Adaçayı (Kuru) and Çemen otu yaprağı are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Adaçayı (Kuru) has 315.0 kcal and Çemen otu yaprağı has 49.0 kcal. The difference is 266.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 76 and 88. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
20 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Adaçayı (Kuru) | Çemen otu yaprağı | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 295 µg | 215 µg | -27.1% |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.75 mg | 0.05 mg | -93.3% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.34 mg | 0.31 mg | -8.8% |
| B6 Vitamini | 2.69 mg | 0.12 mg | -95.5% |
| Bakir | — | 0.18 mg | — |
| Beta Karoten | — | 2580 µg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 31.4 mg | 52 mg | +65.6% |
| Demir | 28.12 mg | 3.2 mg | -88.6% |
| Diyet lifi | 40.3 g | 2.5 g | -93.8% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 7.48 mg | — | — |
| Folat DFE | 274 µg | — | — |
| Fosfor | 91 mg | 51 mg | -44.0% |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 1714 µg | 160 µg | -90.7% |
| Kalsiyum | 1652 mg | 395 mg | -76.1% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 60.73 g | 6 g | -90.1% |
| Kül | 7.93 g | 1.5 g | -81.1% |
| Magnezyum | 428 mg | 54 mg | -87.4% |
| Mangan | 3.13 mg | — | — |
| Niasin | 5.72 mg | 0.85 mg | -85.1% |
| Potasyum | 1070 mg | 380 mg | -64.5% |
| Protein | 10.63 g | 4.4 g | -58.6% |
| Sodyum | 11 mg | 42 mg | +281.8% |
| Su | 7.96 g | 86.2 g | +982.9% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 7.01 g | — | — |
| Toplam Folat | — | 84 µg | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 1.87 g | — | — |
| Toplam yağ | 12.75 g | 0.9 g | -92.9% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 1.76 g | — | — |
| Toplam Şeker | 1.71 g | — | — |
| Çinko | 4.7 mg | 0.42 mg | -91.1% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Adaçayı (Kuru) and Çemen otu yaprağı.
Çemen otu yaprağı has less energy per 100 g (49 kcal versus 315 kcal).
For measured Su, Adaçayı (Kuru) has 7.96 g and Çemen otu yaprağı has 86.2 g per 100 g. The table shows other nutrients separately.
The score summarizes this site's nutrient model. It does not establish that one food is healthier or suitable for everyone. Scores: Adaçayı (Kuru) 76, Çemen otu yaprağı 88.
Energy and nutrient values in the table are per 100 g. Actual intake changes with serving size.
Data Sources
Records may come from different sources. Check each food page for source and preparation details; do not treat missing measurements as zero.
Analytical Methodology
The scoring algorithm is a scale of 100 based on nutrient density and macro/micro component balance.