Nutrient Comparison: Succotash VS Winter Squash, Hubbard, Baked per 100 g
Compare the macro and micronutrient content in 100 g of Succotash versus 100 g of Winter Squash, Hubbard, Baked to make informed dietary choices. Explore their nutritional differences and benefits.
Lets compare vitamin content per 100 grams of Succotash vs Winter Squash, Hubbard, Baked:
- 100 grams of Succotash have 2.8 times more Vitamin B1, 1.7 times more Vitamin B2, 2.8 times more Vitamin B3, 2.5 times more Vitamin B9 and 1.6 times more Vitamin C than Winter Squash, Hubbard, Baked.
- While 100 g of Winter Squash, Hubbard, Baked no Salt contain 22.3 times more Vitamin A, 3.5 times more Vitamin B5 and 1.3 times more Vitamin B6 than Raw Succotash.
- 100 grams of Succotash have insufficient amounts of Vitamin A
- Both Raw Succotash as well as Winter Squash, Hubbard, Baked no Salt have insufficient amounts of Vitamin B12 and Vitamin D in 100 grams.
Comparing minerals per 100 grams for Succotash vs Winter Squash, Hubbard, Baked:
- 100 grams of Succotash have 4.1 times more Copper, 3.9 times more Iron, 2.2 times more Magnesium, 4 times more Manganese, 4.9 times more Phosphorus and 4.1 times more Zinc than Winter Squash, Hubbard, Baked.
- Both Succotash and Winter Squash, Hubbard, Baked contain similar levels of Potassium per 100 grams.
- 100 grams of Winter Squash, Hubbard, Baked lack sufficient amounts of Zinc
- Both Raw Succotash as well as Winter Squash, Hubbard, Baked no Salt lack sufficient amounts of Calcium and Selenium in 100 grams.
Comparison of macro-nutrients per 100 grams:
- 100 grams of Succotash have 2 times more Energy, 4.2 times more Omega 6, 1.8 times more Carbohydrate and 2 times more Protein than Winter Squash, Hubbard, Baked.
- While 100 g of Winter Squash, Hubbard, Baked no Salt contain 2.1 times more Omega 3 and 1.3 times more Fiber than Raw Succotash.
- 100 grams of Winter Squash, Hubbard, Baked provide inadequate amounts of Energy and Omega 6