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.
Alfalfa Tohum, Filizlenmiş, Çiğ has a higher nutrition quality score (91) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
23 vs 16(-30.4%)
Score Diff
91 vs 85(-6.6%)
OVERALL WINNER
Alfalfa Tohum - Çiğ
Higher energy
Alfalfa Tohum - Çiğ
Score leader
Alfalfa Tohum - Çiğ
Nutrient split
39 - 13 (tie: 31)
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.
Alfalfa Tohum, Filizlenmiş, Çiğ and Turp, Çiğ are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Alfalfa Tohum, Filizlenmiş, Çiğ has 23.0 kcal and Turp, Çiğ has 16.0 kcal. The difference is 7.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 91 and 85. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
83 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Alfalfa Tohum - Çiğ | Turp, Çiğ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (IU) | 155 iu | 7 iu | -95.5% |
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 8 µg | 0 µg | -100.0% |
| Alanin | — | 0.03 g | — |
| Alfa Karoten | 6 µg | 0 µg | -100.0% |
| Alfa tokotrienol | — | 0.02 mg | — |
| Arjinin | — | 0.04 g | — |
| Aspartik asit | — | 0.06 g | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.08 mg | 0.01 mg | -87.5% |
| B12 Vitamini | 0 µg | 0 µg | — |
| B12 Vitamini (eklenmiş) | 0 µg | 0 µg | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.13 mg | 0.04 mg | -69.2% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.03 mg | 0.07 mg | +133.3% |
| Bakir | 0.16 mg | 0.05 mg | -68.8% |
| Besin folati | 36 µg | 25 µg | -30.6% |
| Beta Karoten | 87 µg | 4 µg | -95.4% |
| Beta kriptoksantin | 6 µg | 0 µg | -100.0% |
| Beta tokoferol | — | 0 mg | — |
| Beta tokotrienol | — | 0 mg | — |
| Betain | 0.4 mg | 0.1 mg | -75.0% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 8.2 mg | 14.8 mg | +80.5% |
| D Vitamini | 0 µg | 0 µg | — |
| D Vitamini (IU) | 0 iu | 0 iu | — |
| Delta tokoferol | — | 0 mg | — |
| Delta tokotrienol | — | 0 mg | — |
| Demir | 0.96 mg | 0.34 mg | -64.6% |
| DHA (22:6 n-3) | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Diyet lifi | 1.9 g | 1.6 g | -15.8% |
| DPA (22:5 n-3) | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 0.02 mg | 0 mg | -100.0% |
| E Vitamini (eklenmiş) | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Enerji | 23 kj | 66 kj | +187.0% |
| EPA (20:5 n-3) | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Etil alkol | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Fenilalanin | — | 0.04 g | — |
| Fitosteroller | — | 7 mg | — |
| Florür | — | 6 µg | — |
| Folat DFE | 36 µg | 25 µg | -30.6% |
| Folik asit | 0 µg | 0 µg | — |
| Fosfor | 70 mg | 20 mg | -71.4% |
| Fruktoz | 0.12 g | 0.71 g | +491.7% |
| Galaktoz | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Gama tokoferol | — | 0 mg | — |
| Gama tokotrienol | — | 0 mg | — |
| Glikoz | 0.08 g | 1.05 g | +1212.5% |
| Glisin | — | 0.03 g | — |
| Glutamik asit | — | 0.16 g | — |
| Histidin | — | 0.01 g | — |
| Izolosin | 0.14 g | 0.02 g | -85.7% |
| K Vitamini (dihidrofilokinon) | — | 0 µg | — |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 30.5 µg | 1.3 µg | -95.7% |
| Kafein | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Kalsiyum | 32 mg | 25 mg | -21.9% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 2.1 g | 3.4 g | +61.9% |
| Kolesterol | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Kül | 0.4 g | 0.55 g | +37.5% |
| Laktoz | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Likopen | 0 µg | 0 µg | — |
| Lizin | 0.21 g | 0.03 g | -85.7% |
| Losin | 0.27 g | 0.03 g | -88.9% |
| Lutein + zeaksantin | 0 µg | 10 µg | — |
| Magnezyum | 27 mg | 10 mg | -63.0% |
| Maltoz | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Mangan | 0.19 mg | 0.07 mg | -63.2% |
| Metiyonin | — | 0.01 g | — |
| MUFA 16:1 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| MUFA 18:1 (oleik asit) | 0.06 g | 0.02 g | -66.7% |
| MUFA 20:1 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| MUFA 22:1 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Niasin | 0.48 mg | 0.25 mg | -47.9% |
| Nisasta | — | 0 g | — |
| Pantotenik asit | 0.56 mg | 0.17 mg | -69.6% |
| Potasyum | 79 mg | 233 mg | +194.9% |
| Prolin | — | 0.02 g | — |
| Protein | 3.99 g | 0.68 g | -83.0% |
| PUFA 18:2 (linoleik asit) | 0.23 g | 0.02 g | -91.3% |
| PUFA 18:3 | 0.17 g | 0.03 g | -82.4% |
| PUFA 18:4 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| PUFA 20:4 (arasidonik asit) | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Retinol | 0 µg | 0 µg | — |
| Sakkaroz | 0 g | 0.1 g | — |
| Selenyum | 0.6 µg | 0.6 µg | 0.0% |
| Serin | — | 0.03 g | — |
| SFA 10:0 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| SFA 12:0 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| SFA 14:0 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| SFA 16:0 (palmitik asit) | 0.06 g | 0.03 g | -50.0% |
| SFA 18:0 (stearik asit) | 0.01 g | 0 g | -100.0% |
| SFA 4:0 (butirik asit) | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| SFA 6:0 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| SFA 8:0 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Sistin | — | 0.01 g | — |
| Sodyum | 6 mg | 39 mg | +550.0% |
| Su | 92.82 g | 95.27 g | +2.6% |
| Teobromin | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Tirozin | — | 0.01 g | — |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 0.07 g | 0.03 g | -57.1% |
| Toplam Folat | 36 µg | 25 µg | -30.6% |
| Toplam Kolin | 14.4 mg | 6.5 mg | -54.9% |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 0.06 g | 0.02 g | -66.7% |
| Toplam trans yağ asitleri | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Toplam yağ | 0.69 g | 0.1 g | -85.5% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 0.41 g | 0.05 g | -87.8% |
| Toplam Şeker | 0.2 g | 1.86 g | +830.0% |
| Treonin | 0.13 g | 0.02 g | -84.6% |
| Triptofan | — | 0.01 g | — |
| Valin | 0.14 g | 0.04 g | -71.4% |
| Çinko | 0.92 mg | 0.28 mg | -69.6% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Alfalfa Tohum, Filizlenmiş, Çiğ and Turp, Çiğ.
Turp, Çiğ has less energy per 100 g (16 kcal versus 23 kcal).
For measured Glikoz, Alfalfa Tohum - Çiğ has 0.08 g and Turp, Çiğ has 1.05 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: Alfalfa Tohum - Çiğ 91, Turp, Çiğ 85.
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.