Structured Nutritional Data & Citations
Squid (Cephalopoda): Nutritional Profile and Functional Analysis
1. Nutritional Composition per 100g (Raw, Edible Portion)
| Nutrient Group | Metric | Value | Unit | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Energy | Calories (kcal) | 92 | kcal | USDA FoodData Central, FDC ID: 172935 |
| Macros | Protein | 15.58 | g | USDA FoodData Central, FDC ID: 172935 |
| Total Carbohydrates | 3.08 | g | USDA FoodData Central, FDC ID: 172935 | |
| - Dietary Fiber | 0 | g | USDA FoodData Central, FDC ID: 172935 | |
| - Sugars (total) | 0 | g | USDA FoodData Central, FDC ID: 172935 | |
| Total Fat | 1.39 | g | USDA FoodData Central, FDC ID: 172935 | |
| - Saturated Fatty Acids | 0.354 | g | USDA FoodData Central, FDC ID: 172935 | |
| - Monounsaturated FA | 0.176 | g | USDA FoodData Central, FDC ID: 172935 | |
| - Polyunsaturated FA | 0.441 | g | USDA FoodData Central, FDC ID: 172935 | |
| - Omega-3 (EPA+DHA) | ~0.2-0.3 | g | [1] | |
| Other | Cholesterol | 233 | mg | USDA FoodData Central, FDC ID: 172935 |
| Water | 79.54 | g | USDA FoodData Central, FDC ID: 172935 |
2. Nutritional Composition per Standard Serving (85g / 3 oz, Raw)
| Nutrient Group | Metric | Value | Unit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Energy | Calories (kcal) | 78 | kcal |
| Macros | Protein | 13.24 | g |
| Total Carbohydrates | 2.62 | g | |
| Total Fat | 1.18 | g | |
| Other | Cholesterol | 198 | mg |
3. Key Micronutrients (per 100g, Raw)
- Vitamins:
- Vitamin B12 (Cobalamin): 1.3 µg (54% DV)
- Vitamin B3 (Niacin): 2.1 mg (13% DV)
- Vitamin B6 (Pyridoxine): 0.05 mg (3% DV)
- Vitamin C (Ascorbic Acid): 4.7 mg (5% DV)
- Minerals:
- Selenium: 44.8 µg (81% DV)
- Copper: 1.89 mg (210% DV)
- Phosphorus: 221 mg (18% DV)
- Zinc: 1.0 mg (9% DV)
- Iron: 0.6 mg (3% DV)
- Potassium: 235 mg (5% DV)
- Sodium: 37 mg (2% DV)
- Antioxidants:
- Selenium (as part of selenoproteins)
- Taurine (amino acid, functions as an antioxidant and anti-inflammatory agent) [2]
4. Functional Impact
- Glycemic Index (GI): Very Low (~15-20, estimated). Primarily protein and fat, negligible digestible carbohydrates. [3]
- Glycemic Load (GL): Very Low (~1-2 per 85g serving, estimated).
- Satiety Score: High. High protein content contributes significantly to satiety, promoting fullness and reducing subsequent energy intake. [4]
5. Physical Properties
- Density (Raw): ~1.05 - 1.08 g/cm³ [5]
- Volumetric Contraction after Cooking:
- Mass Reduction: 25-40% (due to water loss) [6]
- Volume Reduction: 20-35% (variable based on cooking method and duration; e.g., deep-frying leads to significant dehydration) [6]
6. Citations & References
[1] U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. FoodData Central, 2019. (FDC ID: 172935, Squid, raw). Accessed [Date]. Note: Omega-3 content is an aggregate from common seafood databases. [2] Huxtable, R. J. (1992). Physiological actions of taurine. Physiological Reviews, 72(4), 101-163. [3] Atkinson, F. S., Foster-Powell, K., & Brand-Miller, J. C. (2008). International Tables of Glycemic Index and Glycemic Load Values: 2008. Diabetes Care, 31(12), 2281-2283. (Estimates based on similar protein-rich, low-carb foods). [4] Paddon-Jones, D., Westman, E. C., Mattes, E. R., Wolfe, R. R., Astrup, P. D., & Blackburn, G. L. (2008). Protein, weight management, and satiety. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 87(5), 1558S-1561S. [5] General scientific consensus on seafood muscle tissue density; specific squid density can vary slightly by species. [6] Personal research and observation; culinary literature on seafood preparation. Mass and volume reduction are complex variables depending on factors like initial moisture content, cooking temperature, and time.
Field Notes: Dr. Aria Vance
Subject: Squid
Focus: Volumetric expansion/contraction, historical context, tracking challenges.
Why Squid Is Difficult to Track
Field Notes - Dr. Aria Vance, Lead Nutrition Data Scientist at NutriSnap
Entry 703: Investigating Teuthida. Squid. Calamari. What a conundrum for accurate dietary tracking. It's truly maddening.
My desk is a graveyard of half-eaten calamari dishes. Fried rings. Grilled tubes. Stuffed. The sheer variability of this cephalopod on a plate is just... wild. Forget your neatly packaged cereal box with its uniform barcode. This isn't that. This is the untamed ocean, landing on your plate with a side of impossible-to-quantify culinary chaos.
Historically, squid was often considered a poor man's food, a readily available protein in coastal communities. Think Mediterranean fishing villages, or the bustling night markets of Southeast Asia, where it's transformed into everything from crispy fritters to delicate stir-fries. It became a delicacy, "calamari," in Western cuisine, and bam! suddenly everyone wants to eat it, but nobody can tell you what they're actually eating.
Try manually tracking this. Seriously, try it. You've got a plate of fried calamari. Rings, tentacles, maybe a lemon wedge. Your app asks, "How many grams?" I mean, come on. Do you pull out a scale at the restaurant? Do you eye-ball it? The problem isn't just the squid itself; it’s the preparation. The breading. Oh, the breading! It clings, it absorbs. How much oil did those golden-brown rings soak up? Is it a light dusting of semolina or a thick, beer-battered coating? These seemingly minor variations dramatically swing the caloric needle. One bite of fried squid versus a bite of simply grilled, un-oiled squid? Worlds apart. Entire galaxies.
Then there's the serving size illusion. One restaurant's "appetizer portion" might be twice another's. Is it 3 oz of actual squid, or 3 oz of squid plus breading plus absorbed oil? The human eye, bless its heart, is a terrible estimator. And don't even get me started on the sauces. Aioli. Marinara. Sweet chili. Each a caloric landslide that's almost always ignored in manual logging. The fundamental flaw with barcodes, measuring cups, and kitchen scales is their assumption of culinary uniformity. They assume you're eating a singular, pre-defined item. Squid is a shape-shifter. A chameleon. A nutritional enigma wrapped in a delicious, often greasy, coating.
This, this is precisely why we built NutriSnap. Manual tracking for something like squid isn't just tedious; it's fundamentally inaccurate. Our AI photo tracker doesn't just see a "squid ring"; it forensically analyzes the visual texture of the breading, estimates oil absorption based on translucency and sheen, differentiates between grilled char and residual sauce. It learns from millions of images, understanding the volumetric contraction upon cooking, factoring in the likely density changes. We don't just see food. We dissect it, pixel by pixel. It's the only way to truly understand what's on your plate.
Explore More Research
Tired of Manual Tracking?
Stop scanning barcodes and guessing portion sizes. NutriSnap uses forensic AI to track your macros instantly from a single photo.