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
74 kcal
Score
59 / 100
Afrika patlıcanı has a higher nutrition quality score (71) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
28 vs 74(+164.3%)
Score Diff
71 vs 59(-16.9%)
OVERALL WINNER
Afrika patlıcanı
Higher energy
Lotus sapı
Score leader
Afrika patlıcanı
Nutrient split
5 - 13 (tie: 0)
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.
Afrika patlıcanı and Lotus sapı are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Afrika patlıcanı has 28.0 kcal and Lotus sapı has 74.0 kcal. The difference is 46.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 71 and 59. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
18 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Afrika patlıcanı | Lotus sapı | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 5 µg | — | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.05 mg | 0.16 mg | +220.0% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.04 mg | 0.022 mg | -45.0% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.08 mg | 0.258 mg | +222.5% |
| Bakir | — | 0.257 mg | — |
| Beta Karoten | 60 µg | — | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 5 mg | 44 mg | +780.0% |
| Demir | 0.6 mg | 1.16 mg | +93.3% |
| Diyet lifi | 2.5 g | 4.9 g | +96.0% |
| Enerji | 117 kj | — | — |
| Folat DFE | 22 µg | — | — |
| Fosfor | 24 mg | 100 mg | +316.7% |
| Kalsiyum | 18 mg | 45 mg | +150.0% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 5.9 g | 17.23 g | +192.0% |
| Kül | — | 0.97 g | — |
| Magnezyum | 16 mg | 23 mg | +43.8% |
| Mangan | — | 0.261 mg | — |
| Niasin | 0.6 mg | 0.4 mg | -33.3% |
| Pantotenik asit | — | 0.377 mg | — |
| Potasyum | 230 mg | 556 mg | +141.7% |
| Protein | 1.2 g | 2.6 g | +116.7% |
| Selenyum | — | 0.7 µg | — |
| Sodyum | 3 mg | 40 mg | +1233.3% |
| Su | 91.2 g | 79.1 g | -13.3% |
| Toplam Folat | — | 13 µg | — |
| Toplam Kolin | — | 25.4 mg | — |
| Toplam yağ | 0.2 g | 0.1 g | -50.0% |
| Toplam Şeker | 2.8 g | 0.5 g | -82.1% |
| Çinko | 0.17 mg | 0.39 mg | +129.4% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Afrika patlıcanı and Lotus sapı.
Afrika patlıcanı has less energy per 100 g (28 kcal versus 74 kcal).
For measured Sodyum, Afrika patlıcanı has 3 mg and Lotus sapı has 40 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: Afrika patlıcanı 71, Lotus sapı 59.
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.