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
388 kcal
Score
57 / 100
Çörek Otu Tohumu has a higher nutrition quality score (57) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
418 vs 388(-7.2%)
Score Diff
29 vs 57(+96.6%)
OVERALL WINNER
Çörek Otu Tohumu
Higher energy
Akçaağaç tohumu
Score leader
Çörek Otu Tohumu
Nutrient split
3 - 19 (tie: 1)
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.
Akçaağaç tohumu and Çörek Otu Tohumu are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Akçaağaç tohumu has 418.0 kcal and Çörek Otu Tohumu has 388.0 kcal. The difference is 30.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 29 and 57. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
23 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Akçaağaç tohumu | Çörek Otu Tohumu | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.35 mg | 0.35 mg | 0.0% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.18 mg | 0.22 mg | +22.2% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.42 mg | 0.52 mg | +23.8% |
| Bakir | 0.85 mg | 1.2 mg | +41.2% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 2.4 mg | — | — |
| Demir | 4.8 mg | 14.5 mg | +202.1% |
| Diyet lifi | 11.5 g | 26.5 g | +130.4% |
| Enerji | — | 1623 kj | — |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | — | 388 kcal | — |
| Folat DFE | 62 µg | — | — |
| Fosfor | 390 mg | 540 mg | +38.5% |
| Kalsiyum | 145 mg | 570 mg | +293.1% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 38.6 g | 41.5 g | +7.5% |
| Kül | 3.7 g | 4.8 g | +29.7% |
| Magnezyum | 180 mg | 265 mg | +47.2% |
| Mangan | 2.6 mg | 3.2 mg | +23.1% |
| MUFA 18:1 (oleik asit) | — | 6.5 g | — |
| Niasin | 2.1 mg | 5.7 mg | +171.4% |
| Potasyum | 650 mg | 810 mg | +24.6% |
| Protein | 22.4 g | 17.8 g | -20.5% |
| PUFA 18:2 (linoleik asit) | — | 15.6 g | — |
| Sodyum | 9 mg | 22 mg | +144.4% |
| Su | 18.5 g | 7.4 g | -60.0% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 2.1 g | 4.5 g | +114.3% |
| Toplam Folat | — | 62 µg | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 6.5 g | 6.8 g | +4.6% |
| Toplam yağ | 16.8 g | 28.5 g | +69.6% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 7.2 g | 16.2 g | +125.0% |
| Toplam Şeker | 4.2 g | 2.3 g | -45.2% |
| Çinko | 3.2 mg | 5.1 mg | +59.4% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Akçaağaç tohumu and Çörek Otu Tohumu.
Çörek Otu Tohumu has less energy per 100 g (388 kcal versus 418 kcal).
For measured Kalsiyum, Akçaağaç tohumu has 145 mg and Çörek Otu Tohumu has 570 mg 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: Akçaağaç tohumu 29, Çörek Otu Tohumu 57.
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.