Lasagna with meat: canned vs home recipe USDA FDC 2708751 vs 2708753
Per 100 g, canned reports 283 mg sodium, while home recipe reports 416 mg sodium.
The comparison uses two cited USDA records. Their complete source names, household portions, nutrient values, and FoodData Central links remain visible below.
Highlighted difference
Calories at the same 100-gram weight
Bar length shows the two cited values on one shared denominator. It does not rank either food or establish why they differ.
- Lasagna with meat, canned 97 kcal
97 kcal - Lasagna with meat, home recipe 206 kcal
206 kcal
Shared basis: 100 g · kcal
Equal-weight evidence
Nutrition per 100 grams
Both columns use the same mass, which compares nutrient concentration without allowing the two representative source amounts to change the denominator. “A +” or “B +” reports the arithmetic difference between the cited values; it is not a quality score.
On smaller screens, focus a comparison table and scroll horizontally to read every column.
| Nutrient | A · Lasagna with meat, canned | B · Lasagna with meat, home recipe | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| CaloriesMaterial difference | 97 kcal | 206 kcal | B +109 kcal |
| ProteinMaterial difference | 3.2 g | 13.6 g | B +10.4 g |
| Total fatMaterial difference | 3.4 g | 10.9 g | B +7.5 g |
| Carbohydrate | 13.3 g | 13.1 g | A +0.2 g |
| Dietary fiber | 1.5 g | 1.1 g | A +0.4 g |
| Total sugars | 2 g | 1.5 g | A +0.5 g |
| SodiumMaterial difference | 283 mg | 416 mg | B +133 mg |
| Saturated fatMaterial difference | 1.5 g | 5.6 g | B +4.2 g |
| Potassium | 178 mg | 168 mg | A +10 mg |
| Calcium | 12 mg | 272 mg | B +260 mg |
| Iron | 1.1 mg | 0.9 mg | A +0.2 mg |
Values come from the two cited USDA FoodData Central Survey Foods records. Feast does not average records, impute missing values, or infer a nutrient from the food name.
Read the table by question
Every material primary-nutrient difference on this page is numerically higher in B (4 of 4).
These answers describe concentration per 100 grams. “More” and “less” identify the arithmetic direction only; they do not decide which record is a better match or which food is better for a person.
Which reports fewer calories?
Record A
Record A reports 97 kcal, compared with 206 kcal in the other record—a difference of 109 kcal.
Which reports more protein?
Record B
Record B reports 13.6 g, compared with 3.2 g in the other record—a difference of 10.4 g.
Which reports more fiber?
Record A
Record A reports 1.5 g, compared with 1.1 g in the other record—a difference of 0.4 g.
Which reports less sodium?
Record A
Record A reports 283 mg, compared with 416 mg in the other record—a difference of 133 mg.
What differs in the source descriptions
The exact names carry information the numbers cannot.
USDA assigns both records to “Pasta mixed dishes, excludes macaroni and cheese,” but the topic label is broad. Record A is “Lasagna with meat, canned.” Record B is “Lasagna with meat, home recipe.” Feast paired them because their contrast-neutral food identities are an exact match, not merely because they share a generic category.
The controlled name parser found 2 interpretable distinctions. These labels organize wording already present in the names; they do not establish that a distinction caused a nutrient difference.
| Description dimension | Record A | Record B |
|---|---|---|
| Source form | canned | No matching controlled term in the source name |
| Source context | No matching controlled term in the source name | home recipe |
Even a clean name contrast can carry hidden companions. A fried record may also include coating; a restaurant record can use a different recipe; a reduced-sodium description can differ in more than salt; and a source amount can reflect a different reporting convention. That is why this page reports the complete pair rather than treating one word as an intervention.
Portion context
A representative source amount is not a shared “serving.”
Record A uses USDA reference amount at 250 g. Record B uses USDA reference amount at 250 g. Those labels and gram weights come from their respective records. They are useful for scaling the chosen profile, but they are not recommendations and need not describe equal amounts.
The representative amounts do not cross Feast’s material portion-difference threshold of both 15 grams and 20%. They are still separate source measures, so the 100-gram table remains the appropriate place for an equal-weight comparison.
A cup, piece, slice, sandwich, fillet, or fluid ounce can have different gram weights across records. A matching label is not enough: check the listed grams. If accuracy matters more than convenience, weighing the food or using a current package label can be more specific than a generic survey-food measure.
Record A measures
- 1 cup250 g
- 1 can (15 oz)425 g
- USDA reference amount250 g
Record B measures
- 1 piece (1/6 of 8" square, approx 2-1/2" x 4")206 g
- 1 piece (1/8 of 7" x 12", approx 3-1/2" x 3")232 g
- 1 cup250 g
- 1 surface inch21 g
- USDA reference amount250 g
One shared household label
1 cup: 250 g in A vs 250 g in B
Here the household label and listed gram weight match at displayed precision, so this particular table is also an equal-mass comparison. The values remain specific to these two source records, not a universal weight for every 1 cup.
| Nutrient | A · 250 g | B · 250 g |
|---|---|---|
| Calories | 243 kcal | 515 kcal |
| Protein | 8.1 g | 34 g |
| Dietary fiber | 3.8 g | 2.8 g |
| Sodium | 708 mg | 1,040 mg |
USDA source formulation evidence
The listed inputs provide another way to audit the match.
FNDDS includes input-food rows behind each standardized survey-food record. Record A’s leading listed inputs include Ravioli, meat-filled, with tomato sauce or meat sauce, canned. Record B’s include Pasta, cooked, enriched, without added salt, Cheese, mozzarella, low moisture, part-skim, Tomatoes, red, ripe, canned, packed in tomato juice, Cheese, ricotta, whole milk. Ingredient-code overlap is 0%, and normalized listed-input-weight variation is 100%.
Record A · 1 coded input
Lasagna with meat, canned
- Ravioli, meat-filled, with tomato sauce or meat sauce, cannedIngredient code 22900100% of listed input weight
Record B · 12 coded inputs
Lasagna with meat, home recipe
- Pasta, cooked, enriched, without added saltIngredient code 20121 · open source index26.1% of listed input weight
- Cheese, mozzarella, low moisture, part-skimIngredient code 1029 · open source index24.6% of listed input weight
- Tomatoes, red, ripe, canned, packed in tomato juiceIngredient code 11531 · open source index19.5% of listed input weight
- Cheese, ricotta, whole milkIngredient code 1036 · open source index11.7% of listed input weight
- Beef, groundIngredient code 21500100 · open source index9.2% of listed input weight
- Cheese, parmesan, gratedIngredient code 1032 · open source index3.4% of listed input weight
- Onions, cooked, as ingredientIngredient code 99997510 · open source index3.4% of listed input weight
- Eggs, Grade A, Large, egg wholeIngredient code 1123 · open source index1.4% of listed input weight
0 shared coded inputs
The two listed formulations do not share an ingredient code in this source extract. Shared codes can still carry different listed weights.
1 A-only and 12 B-only coded inputs
A-only entries include Ravioli, meat-filled, with tomato sauce or meat sauce, canned. B-only entries include Pasta, cooked, enriched, without added salt, Cheese, mozzarella, low moisture, part-skim, Tomatoes, red, ripe, canned, packed in tomato juice, Cheese, ricotta, whole milk.
Important: repeated rows carrying the same ingredient code are combined before the shares and overlap are calculated. These weights belong to USDA’s source formulation: they are not a reconstructed plate, final cooked yield, visitor serving, ingredient declaration, or estimate of what is visible in a photo. USDA’s FNDDS documentation explains that these calculation recipes can represent multiple variants, may include retention or moisture adjustments, and are not product-label ingredient lists.
- NFS means “not further specified.” The record intentionally leaves the exact subtype, size, or preparation unresolved.
Choosing the closer record
Match context first; scale second.
- 01
Read both names literally
Compare cooking method, coating, edible skin or peel, sauce, additions, venue, source form, and food subtype. For this pair, the full A and B descriptions above are the evidence—not shortened search labels.
- 02
Use listed inputs as a check
If the name still leaves ambiguity, compare the leading and unique source inputs. They can reveal that two near names refer to meaningfully different standardized formulations, but they do not reconstruct your dish.
- 03
Choose an amount for that record
After choosing A or B, use its own named measure and gram weight. Do not transfer a cup, slice, or “typical amount” from the other record as if the measures were interchangeable.
- 04
Account for missing details
Brand, current restaurant recipe, cooking oil, drained weight, toppings, substitutions, and unfinished portions may not be captured. A label or weighed recipe can supersede a generic reference when it better matches the actual food.
Limits and responsible interpretation
This is a comparison of records, not a causal study.
The two records come from 2021–2023 FoodData Central Survey Foods data. The nutrient table faithfully compares their published values on the same weight basis. It does not measure two plates prepared at the same time, isolate one ingredient, or estimate the uncertainty around either value.
For this pair, the source names differ across 2 documented description dimensions, while the listed formulations show 0% ingredient-code overlap and 100% normalized listed-weight variation. Moisture, ingredient proportions, preparation, and record construction can therefore move together. The page can describe the combined record difference; it cannot isolate the effect of one word.
A higher or lower number is not an overall verdict. Protein, fiber, sodium, energy, fat, micronutrients, preferences, allergies, budget, portion, and an individual’s goals answer different questions. Feast therefore reports directions and magnitudes without applying a universal “healthier” label.
This page is educational and does not diagnose a condition, prescribe a target, or replace advice from a qualified professional. For an allergy, medically directed diet, or strict ingredient limit, use verified ingredient information and guidance appropriate to that situation.
How this page qualified
A page is published only when the pair clears materiality and diversity gates.
Both records must occupy the same USDA survey-food topic and share a close food identity after a controlled vocabulary separates preparation, edible-part, source, claim, crust, and sauce wording. Exact contrast-neutral identities receive priority. Close ingredient or form substitutions can qualify when name overlap remains high and the numerical evidence is material.
For primary nutrients, Feast requires both an absolute and relative difference: at least 20 kcal and 12% for energy; 2 g and 18% for protein or fat; 5 g and 15% for carbohydrate; 1 g and 20% for fiber; 4 g and 20% for sugars; or 100 mg and 20% for sodium. A focused one-nutrient pair also needs a material representative-amount or formulation distinction. Rounding-only pairs are not published.
Unordered FDC IDs define a canonical pair, so reversing A and B cannot create another page. Each source record can appear twice at most, each USDA topic contributes no more than 40 pages, and closely repeated identity families are capped. Those rules produced a selective comparison library rather than every mathematical combination in the corpus.
Read the complete nutrition-page methodology for import, nutrient mapping, portion scaling, Daily Value, and uncertainty rules.
Decision support from the exact records on this page
Turn source data into a better next decision
These conclusions and reading paths are computed from 2 exact records behind Lasagna with meat, canned versus Lasagna with meat, home recipe. Links are chosen by record identity, controlled contrast, formulation input, nutrient spread, or serving context—not by loose keyword similarity.
Equal-weight result
Lasagna with meat, home recipe is higher in calories per 100 g
Lasagna with meat, home recipe reports 206 kcal versus 97 kcal for Lasagna with meat, canned: a 109 kcal difference when both are normalized to 100 g.
Inspect the underlying evidenceThese listed servings have equal weights
2 listed servings each weigh 250 g
The 2 records with a listed serving weight on this page each use 250 g. Their serving totals therefore compare equal weights, even if the household labels differ. Match the preparation and adjust the weight to the amount you eat.
Record identity is part of the estimate
Distinguish “Lasagna with meat, canned” from “Lasagna with meat, home recipe”
These are separate USDA records with separate formulations or survey descriptions. Match preparation, additions, and the named household amount before borrowing either record’s nutrients.
Inspect the underlying evidenceContextual knowledge graph
Follow the relationship that matches your question
For Lasagna with meat, canned versus Lasagna with meat, home recipe, each path states why the destination belongs here, so you can distinguish a true evidentiary connection from a merely similar label.
Lasagna with meat, canned and Lasagna with meat, home recipe are explicitly linked in this guide, which separates direct name matches from contextual variants.
Follow this evidence path Put the observed spread in corpus context Calories: density and serving contextIn this page’s records, calories runs from 97 kcal in Lasagna with meat, canned to 206 kcal in Lasagna with meat, home recipe, all per 100 g.
Follow this evidence path 2 exact records carried forward Lasagna with meatLasagna with meat, canned and Lasagna with meat, home recipe are explicitly linked in this guide, which separates direct name matches from contextual variants.
Follow this evidence path Test a nearby record choice Lasagna with meat, canned vs Lasagna with meat, from restaurantLasagna with meat, canned is held as one side of the comparison. The explicit record-description contrast is Source form: canned versus No matching controlled term in the source name; it is a selection cue, not evidence of cause.
Follow this evidence path A formulation detail that separates records Beef, groundUSDA input 21500100 appears in 1 of 2 context records; its summed listed input weight spans 340.2–340.2 g across those source formulations. These are source-formulation input weights, not plated or serving weights. Follow the code to inspect every represented occurrence.
Follow this evidence path A formulation detail that separates records Cheese, mozzarella, low moisture, part-skimUSDA input 1029 appears in 1 of 2 context records; its summed listed input weight spans 907.2–907.2 g across those source formulations. These are source-formulation input weights, not plated or serving weights. Follow the code to inspect every represented occurrence.
Follow this evidence path Put the observed spread in corpus context Calcium: density and serving contextIn this page’s records, calcium runs from 12 mg in Lasagna with meat, canned to 272 mg in Lasagna with meat, home recipe, all per 100 g.
Follow this evidence path