Answer in brief
There is no single authoritative nutrition profile for “microgreens”. The name covers many crops harvested under different conditions. A value is useful only when it identifies the crop, harvest stage, fresh- or dry-weight basis, laboratory method, and source.
The best-known USDA-led study of 25 varieties measured vitamin C, carotenoids, vitamin K, and vitamin E. It did not publish a universal calorie, protein, carbohydrate, or fiber table for every microgreen. This guide keeps those evidence boundaries visible.
What has been measured per 100g?
| Source and sample | What was measured | Result reported by the study | What it does not prove |
|---|---|---|---|
| Xiao et al. (2012), 25 commercial varieties | Vitamin C, carotenoids, vitamin K, vitamin E | Vitamin C ranged from 20.4–147.0 mg/100g fresh weight; concentrations varied widely by variety | A universal macro or calorie profile |
| Xiao et al. (2016), 30 Brassicaceae varieties | Nine macro- and micro-minerals | Mineral concentrations differed by variety; potassium was most abundant overall | Values for pea shoots, sunflower, or every grow system |
| Palmitessa et al. (2020), three Brassica crops under controlled treatments | Protein and fiber on a fresh-weight basis | Crop means ranged from 2.34–3.12 g protein and 0.355–0.681 g fiber/100g | A ranking of all microgreen varieties |
The unit matters. A result stated per 100g fresh weight cannot be compared directly with a freeze-dried or dry-weight result.
Why nutrition numbers differ
Microgreen composition changes with:
- species and cultivar;
- harvest age;
- light intensity and spectrum;
- substrate and nutrient solution;
- irrigation and temperature;
- storage time;
- the part of the plant analyzed;
- laboratory method and reporting unit.
Two credible studies can therefore report different results without either being “wrong.” The mistake is removing the study context and presenting one value as guaranteed for every product.
What does USDA data actually cover?
The 2012 USDA-led analysis is strong evidence for selected vitamins and carotenoids in its 25 samples. It reported wide variation and identified different top-performing varieties for different compounds. USDA’s own summary also notes that growing, harvesting, and handling conditions can materially affect nutrient content.
USDA FoodData Central is a broader food-composition database, but a record for a mature radish, mature kale, seeds, or generic leafy greens is not automatically a laboratory result for the corresponding microgreen. This site no longer substitutes those mature-food records into a microgreen table.
Protein, fiber, and calorie questions
For a focused answer, use these evidence guides:
- Microgreens protein per 100g
- Microgreens fiber per 100g
- How to interpret microgreens calories
- Vitamins and minerals by study
- Microgreens versus mature vegetables
These pages distinguish directly measured microgreen results from estimates and mature-vegetable comparisons.
Is 100g a realistic serving?
Per-100g values are useful for comparison, but microgreens are often eaten in much smaller amounts. A 30g portion contains 30% of a value reported per 100g. For example, the three crop means of 2.34–3.12 g protein would scale to about 0.70–0.94 g in 30g for those study crops and conditions.
That calculation is not a universal serving claim. For packaged microgreens, use the tested product label when available.
How to evaluate a nutrition claim
Before trusting a chart, ask:
- Does it name the exact crop and cultivar?
- Is the value fresh weight or dry weight?
- Was the microgreen itself tested, or was mature-vegetable data reused?
- Does the source report the number shown?
- Are growing and harvest conditions described?
- Is the result presented as a study value rather than a medical promise?
If any of these are missing, treat the number as an estimate rather than an exact fact.
Put the evidence into practice
Use the nutrition evidence hub to compare study scope, choose a variety to grow, and then use your harvest in one of 17 recipes. Nutrition data is most useful as context for a varied diet, not as a promise that one crop prevents or treats disease.
Sources and editorial method
- Xiao et al. (2012), Assessment of vitamin and carotenoid concentrations of emerging food products: edible microgreens, DOI: 10.1021/jf300459b.
- Xiao et al. (2016), Microgreens of Brassicaceae: mineral composition and content of 30 varieties, DOI: 10.1016/j.jfca.2016.04.006.
- Palmitessa et al. (2020), controlled Brassica microgreen protein and fiber measurements, Foods.
- Turner, Luo, and Buchanan (2020), review of microgreen nutrition, food safety, and shelf life.
Last evidence review: 1 September 2026. This educational page is not medical advice.