Bread Porn
- Thread starter Tim F
- Start date
Help Support Australia & New Zealand Homebrewing Forum:
Scooby Tha Newbie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15/8/13
- Messages
- 397
- Reaction score
- 79
Around 15/25% will give good results. The moisture content of the grain should be considerd when making the dough. I've not done this yet but I will dry out the grain after the silly season. This will do two things. Help to stabilise the grain and improve its shelf life. As well after drying it will be easier to add to a recipe. If adding dry spent grain then the % can be much higher. This I feel is the way to go for Home bread makers.Spent grain is a wasted resource I think.
EDIT;
Enzyme activity whilst proving your doughs (from the spent grain) will also affect your sour dough in a negative way. Mainly the aspect of structure within the bread,if adding to high % to sour dough the gluten (structure) will mellow to fast and lose the abilty to hold gas and keep its shape.
EDIT;
Enzyme activity whilst proving your doughs (from the spent grain) will also affect your sour dough in a negative way. Mainly the aspect of structure within the bread,if adding to high % to sour dough the gluten (structure) will mellow to fast and lose the abilty to hold gas and keep its shape.
Scooby Tha Newbie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15/8/13
- Messages
- 397
- Reaction score
- 79
Navigation bar--use text links at bottom of page.
Are enzymes really the life force in raw foods?
Heat treatment tests on seeds disprove raw food enzyme claims
by Thomas E. Billings
Copyright 2011: text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Credit Beyond Vegetarianism, http://www.beyondveg.com, when sharing this page.
Creative Commons License
Introduction:
enzyme claims restated as a hypothesis
In the raw vegan/vegetarian community, one may encounter a number of claims about food enzymes, including the following.
Enzymes in raw foods are [a]live and are the life force in those foods.
Enzymes in raw foods are reportedly “destroyed” (denatured may be more accurate) when food is heated above a certain critical temperature, approximately 48° C/118° F.
Foods heated above this critical temperature – even if only for a very brief period - are said to be “cooked” or “dead”.
Many raw fooders, whether they believe the raw food enzyme claims or not, use the temperature of 48° C/118° F (or an even lower value) as a dividing line between raw and cooked foods.
Let’s start with claim #1. The term live enzymes can be immediately dismissed as incorrect because enzymes are merely molecules and lack nearly all the basic characteristics of life forms (see Davison, 2004, for a list of attributes). The term life force is undefined here, making it difficult to understand the claim. If we interpret the words literally, we can immediately reject the claim, since enzymes are molecules (matter), and a life force is not matter but some kind of energy.
However, assuming that those who make the claim are using figurative language, we can restate #1 above – for clarity – as: the heat-sensitive enzymes in raw foods are a proxy or marker for the (undefined) life force in foods. Since claim #2 asserts that the relevant enzymes are “destroyed” by heat above the critical temperature of 48° C/118° F, it follows that any/all foods heated above that temperature have lost their life force and must be “dead”.
The term all used in the preceding sentence must include seeds for the claim to be true. Seeds have a well-known property: seeds that are alive can germinate (sprout) and grow, if they are planted under appropriate conditions. The fact that a growing plant is alive – and presumably has the (undefined) life force - is self-evident. If we focus on seeds, the enzyme claims (1-3 above) can be combined to produce a testable hypothesis:
IF the heat-sensitive enzymes in raw foods are a proxy/marker for the (undefined) life force,
THEN seeds heated above the critical temperature of 48° C/118° F must be dead and cannot germinate (sprout).
Note that by recognizing that a growing plant is alive and has the (undefined) life force, we avoid the requirement to formally define the term.
Relevance of heat tolerance and heat shock/heat stress tests on seeds
The published scientific literature includes many studies that test seeds for heat tolerance or heat stress/shock. Heat tolerance studies are conducted to investigate the effects of heat treatments on seeds, including: a) possible reduction of pathogens (e.g., fungi, bacteria), b) standardize germination rates, and c) break the dormancy of seeds. Heat stress/shock studies typically use very high temperatures, and may be conducted to investigate the effects of fire on plant reproduction. Many of the published heat tolerance/heat stress studies on seeds provide excellent tests for the enzyme hypothesis stated above. The enclosed table summarizes the results from a sample of relevant studies.
Table 1.0: Summary of sample heat treatment & heat shock/heat stress studies on seeds
Research
paper
Species tested
Temperatures tested
Exposure time/ treatments
Germination period
Germination rates (%)
Comments
Lee et al., 2002
Rice:
Oryza sativa
Unheated,
90° C/194° F,
90° C/194° F
Control,
1 day,
4 days
12 days
86-100%,
22.0-96.5%,
54.3-70.0%
5 varieties in test,
5 varieties in test,
6 varieties tested, only 2 germinated
Fourest et al., 1990
Barley:
Hordeum vulgare
71° C/159.8° F,
75° C/167.0° F,
84° C/183.2° F
11 days
7 days; root sprout>1 cm. to count
92%,
60%,
60%
Rates read from fig.2 in paper (note 2). 25 varieties in test.
Daws et al., 2007
26 Aizoaceae
6 Crassulaceae
5 Cactaceae
(desert succulents)
103° C/ 217.4° F
17 hours
Not specified
20-100%,
0-3%,
3-90%
Rates read from fig.1 in paper (note 2).
Seeds in study are small: 0.043 – 0.86 mg.
Baker et al., 2005
9 Australian fire ephemerals (see note 3 for definition)
70° C/158° F,
100° C/212° F,
1 hr + smoke water (see note 3 for definition)
84 days
30-80% for 5 species,
8-28% for 4 species
Rates read from fig.4 in paper (note 2).
Bell & Williams, 1998
21 Australian species
100° C/212° F
1 hr,
1.5 hr
(in boiling water)
21 days
6 species:
10.7-60%,
5 species:
6.7-36.0%
Weiss & Hammes, 2003
Mung bean:
Phaseolus aureus
Unheated,
70° C/158° F,
80° C/176° F
Control,
10 minutes (in hot water)
2 days
99%,
94%,
87.5%
Rates read from fig.2 in paper (note 2).
O’Reilly & De Atrip, 2007
Alder:
Alnus glutinosa,
Birch:
Betula pubescens
Unheated,
60° C/140° F
Control, vs
1-4 hrs
42 days
Alder:
11.5-59.5% vs 29.6-57.4%. Birch:
24.0-27.5% vs
11.0-26.3 %
High proportion of birch seeds are non-viable; birch treatments with 0% germination are excluded
Hanley & Fenner, 1998
6 Mediterranean fire ephemerals (see note 3 for definition)
Unheated,
100-120° C in 10° intervals/
212-248° F
Control,
10 minutes
56 days
Control:
30-90%,
100°: 30-60% for 3 species,
110°: 60% for 1
120°: 30% for 1
Rates read from fig.1 in paper (note 2). The only 2 species to grow after >=110° treatments have small seeds: 0.86-0.97 mg. See note 4.
Sidari et al., 2008
Pine tree:
Pinus pinea (Mediterranean region)
Unheated,
80° C/176° F,
110° C/230° F,
140° C/284° F
Control,
20 minutes,
3 minutes,
3 minutes
3 days
100%,
60%,
80%,
60%
De Villalobos et al., 2002
Calden tree:
Prosopis caldenia
(Argentina)
Unheated,
371° C/699.8° F,
449° C/840.2° F
Control,
duration unclear; may be <2 mins at max temp
21 days
5.2%,
11.7%,
6.7%
Study used controlled burns.
Banda et al., 2006
Kiaat tree/Mukua:
Pterocarpus angolensis
(Africa)
Unheated,
450° C/842° F
Control,
1 minute
2 years
40%,
15%
Rates from paper fig. 3; natural germination rate is ~2%.
Notes:
Three columns: Temperature tested, Exposure time, Germination rates are parallel: multiple rows per paper correspond to multiple temperatures tested.
In some studies, the relevant test results were shown only as graphs. For those studies, the numbers were obtained (estimated) by reading the graph.
“Fire ephemerals are short-lived plants with seeds that persist in the soil and germinate after a fire or physical disturbance.” Baker et al. 2005, p. 345. Smoke water is water that contains certain chemicals found in wood smoke. For more information on smoke water, see Flematti et al. (2004).
For similar studies, see Hanley (2009) and Hanley et al. (2001).
Highlights from the table (note: this section is redundant but is provided for those who want a quick summary):
Rice was heated to 90° C/194° F for 4 days and still sprouted, i.e., most seeds were still alive after long exposure to temperatures much higher than 48° C/118° F.
Barley was heated to 84° C/183.2° F for 11 days and still sprouted.
Very small seeds were heated to 103° C/217.4° F for 17 hours and still sprouted.
Seeds of 3 Australian species were boiled in 100° C/212° F water for 90 minutes and still sprouted.
Seeds of 2 species were exposed to fire, 371-450° C/700-842° F for short periods, and still sprouted.
Discussion
According to the raw food enzyme claims, the heat-treated seeds described above (and in the table) have lost their enzymes and are “dead”, so consequently they cannot germinate/sprout. The fact that they do germinate provides clear, unequivocal proof that the “heat-sensitive enzymes are the life force” hypothesis is false. It also directly challenges the common raw food belief that foods heated above the temperature of 48° C/118° F are always “dead”. It further raises additional questions as to whether heat-sensitive enzyme content should ever be used as a proxy measure for assessing how “alive” a particular food is, i.e., as a measure of vitality.
Enzyme advocates may note the reduced germination rates for heat-treated seeds in the table, and equivocate and say that is proof that heating can reduce the vitality of the seed. The statement is partially valid but also irrelevant; it does not override the fact that the seed studies presented here disprove the enzyme hypothesis. Note also that the table is a summary and excludes details from some of the studies showing that heat treatment in some cases enhanced seed germination.
Other forms of heat-tolerant plant life. Seeds are not the only form of plant life resistant to high temperatures. Pollen shows similar tolerance of high temperatures. Exposure of Petunia pollen to 60° C/140° F for 2 days (also 75° C/167° F for 1 day) did not impair the ability of the pollen to set fruits. Nicotiana pollen exposed to 75°C/167° F for 6-12 hours was able to set seed (Rao et al., 1995). “The grass Dichanthelium lanuginosum can tolerate long-term soil temperatures up to 57°C [134.6° F]” (Daws et al., 2007, p. 265).
Heat-tolerant bacteria. Some species of bacteria – simple single-celled organisms whose bodies are mostly water and who lack cooling mechanisms – show remarkable heat tolerance. “A wide variety of bacteria thrive at temperatures from 70 to 90° C [158-194° F]” (Brock & Boylen, 1973). Heat-tolerant bacteria are found in natural hot water habitats (e.g., hot springs) and in artificial ones as well, including hot-water heaters. Bacteria that grow at temperatures above 100° C/212° F have been found in underwater volcanic thermal vents. Thermophilic (heat-loving) bacteria have thermostable (heat-stable or heat-tolerant) enzymes; an example is the enzyme pullulanase in Clostridium thermohydrosulfuricum, which functions optimally at a temperature of 90° C/194° F (Lowe et al., 1993).
Some seeds have heat-tolerant enzymes. The reality is that seeds and seedlings can contain enzymes that are stable above the temperature of 48° C/118° F. The paper by Eglington et al. (1998) is a suggested entry point for those interested in the related scientific literature. Will raw food enzyme advocates change their long-standing claims in response to this information, and assert that the heat-stable enzymes in foods are important? If they do so, is that equivalent to saying that “cooked” foods are as good as raw foods?
Are enzymes really the life force in raw foods?
Heat treatment tests on seeds disprove raw food enzyme claims
by Thomas E. Billings
Copyright 2011: text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Credit Beyond Vegetarianism, http://www.beyondveg.com, when sharing this page.
Creative Commons License
Introduction:
enzyme claims restated as a hypothesis
In the raw vegan/vegetarian community, one may encounter a number of claims about food enzymes, including the following.
Enzymes in raw foods are [a]live and are the life force in those foods.
Enzymes in raw foods are reportedly “destroyed” (denatured may be more accurate) when food is heated above a certain critical temperature, approximately 48° C/118° F.
Foods heated above this critical temperature – even if only for a very brief period - are said to be “cooked” or “dead”.
Many raw fooders, whether they believe the raw food enzyme claims or not, use the temperature of 48° C/118° F (or an even lower value) as a dividing line between raw and cooked foods.
Let’s start with claim #1. The term live enzymes can be immediately dismissed as incorrect because enzymes are merely molecules and lack nearly all the basic characteristics of life forms (see Davison, 2004, for a list of attributes). The term life force is undefined here, making it difficult to understand the claim. If we interpret the words literally, we can immediately reject the claim, since enzymes are molecules (matter), and a life force is not matter but some kind of energy.
However, assuming that those who make the claim are using figurative language, we can restate #1 above – for clarity – as: the heat-sensitive enzymes in raw foods are a proxy or marker for the (undefined) life force in foods. Since claim #2 asserts that the relevant enzymes are “destroyed” by heat above the critical temperature of 48° C/118° F, it follows that any/all foods heated above that temperature have lost their life force and must be “dead”.
The term all used in the preceding sentence must include seeds for the claim to be true. Seeds have a well-known property: seeds that are alive can germinate (sprout) and grow, if they are planted under appropriate conditions. The fact that a growing plant is alive – and presumably has the (undefined) life force - is self-evident. If we focus on seeds, the enzyme claims (1-3 above) can be combined to produce a testable hypothesis:
IF the heat-sensitive enzymes in raw foods are a proxy/marker for the (undefined) life force,
THEN seeds heated above the critical temperature of 48° C/118° F must be dead and cannot germinate (sprout).
Note that by recognizing that a growing plant is alive and has the (undefined) life force, we avoid the requirement to formally define the term.
Relevance of heat tolerance and heat shock/heat stress tests on seeds
The published scientific literature includes many studies that test seeds for heat tolerance or heat stress/shock. Heat tolerance studies are conducted to investigate the effects of heat treatments on seeds, including: a) possible reduction of pathogens (e.g., fungi, bacteria), b) standardize germination rates, and c) break the dormancy of seeds. Heat stress/shock studies typically use very high temperatures, and may be conducted to investigate the effects of fire on plant reproduction. Many of the published heat tolerance/heat stress studies on seeds provide excellent tests for the enzyme hypothesis stated above. The enclosed table summarizes the results from a sample of relevant studies.
Table 1.0: Summary of sample heat treatment & heat shock/heat stress studies on seeds
Research
paper
Species tested
Temperatures tested
Exposure time/ treatments
Germination period
Germination rates (%)
Comments
Lee et al., 2002
Rice:
Oryza sativa
Unheated,
90° C/194° F,
90° C/194° F
Control,
1 day,
4 days
12 days
86-100%,
22.0-96.5%,
54.3-70.0%
5 varieties in test,
5 varieties in test,
6 varieties tested, only 2 germinated
Fourest et al., 1990
Barley:
Hordeum vulgare
71° C/159.8° F,
75° C/167.0° F,
84° C/183.2° F
11 days
7 days; root sprout>1 cm. to count
92%,
60%,
60%
Rates read from fig.2 in paper (note 2). 25 varieties in test.
Daws et al., 2007
26 Aizoaceae
6 Crassulaceae
5 Cactaceae
(desert succulents)
103° C/ 217.4° F
17 hours
Not specified
20-100%,
0-3%,
3-90%
Rates read from fig.1 in paper (note 2).
Seeds in study are small: 0.043 – 0.86 mg.
Baker et al., 2005
9 Australian fire ephemerals (see note 3 for definition)
70° C/158° F,
100° C/212° F,
1 hr + smoke water (see note 3 for definition)
84 days
30-80% for 5 species,
8-28% for 4 species
Rates read from fig.4 in paper (note 2).
Bell & Williams, 1998
21 Australian species
100° C/212° F
1 hr,
1.5 hr
(in boiling water)
21 days
6 species:
10.7-60%,
5 species:
6.7-36.0%
Weiss & Hammes, 2003
Mung bean:
Phaseolus aureus
Unheated,
70° C/158° F,
80° C/176° F
Control,
10 minutes (in hot water)
2 days
99%,
94%,
87.5%
Rates read from fig.2 in paper (note 2).
O’Reilly & De Atrip, 2007
Alder:
Alnus glutinosa,
Birch:
Betula pubescens
Unheated,
60° C/140° F
Control, vs
1-4 hrs
42 days
Alder:
11.5-59.5% vs 29.6-57.4%. Birch:
24.0-27.5% vs
11.0-26.3 %
High proportion of birch seeds are non-viable; birch treatments with 0% germination are excluded
Hanley & Fenner, 1998
6 Mediterranean fire ephemerals (see note 3 for definition)
Unheated,
100-120° C in 10° intervals/
212-248° F
Control,
10 minutes
56 days
Control:
30-90%,
100°: 30-60% for 3 species,
110°: 60% for 1
120°: 30% for 1
Rates read from fig.1 in paper (note 2). The only 2 species to grow after >=110° treatments have small seeds: 0.86-0.97 mg. See note 4.
Sidari et al., 2008
Pine tree:
Pinus pinea (Mediterranean region)
Unheated,
80° C/176° F,
110° C/230° F,
140° C/284° F
Control,
20 minutes,
3 minutes,
3 minutes
3 days
100%,
60%,
80%,
60%
De Villalobos et al., 2002
Calden tree:
Prosopis caldenia
(Argentina)
Unheated,
371° C/699.8° F,
449° C/840.2° F
Control,
duration unclear; may be <2 mins at max temp
21 days
5.2%,
11.7%,
6.7%
Study used controlled burns.
Banda et al., 2006
Kiaat tree/Mukua:
Pterocarpus angolensis
(Africa)
Unheated,
450° C/842° F
Control,
1 minute
2 years
40%,
15%
Rates from paper fig. 3; natural germination rate is ~2%.
Notes:
Three columns: Temperature tested, Exposure time, Germination rates are parallel: multiple rows per paper correspond to multiple temperatures tested.
In some studies, the relevant test results were shown only as graphs. For those studies, the numbers were obtained (estimated) by reading the graph.
“Fire ephemerals are short-lived plants with seeds that persist in the soil and germinate after a fire or physical disturbance.” Baker et al. 2005, p. 345. Smoke water is water that contains certain chemicals found in wood smoke. For more information on smoke water, see Flematti et al. (2004).
For similar studies, see Hanley (2009) and Hanley et al. (2001).
Highlights from the table (note: this section is redundant but is provided for those who want a quick summary):
Rice was heated to 90° C/194° F for 4 days and still sprouted, i.e., most seeds were still alive after long exposure to temperatures much higher than 48° C/118° F.
Barley was heated to 84° C/183.2° F for 11 days and still sprouted.
Very small seeds were heated to 103° C/217.4° F for 17 hours and still sprouted.
Seeds of 3 Australian species were boiled in 100° C/212° F water for 90 minutes and still sprouted.
Seeds of 2 species were exposed to fire, 371-450° C/700-842° F for short periods, and still sprouted.
Discussion
According to the raw food enzyme claims, the heat-treated seeds described above (and in the table) have lost their enzymes and are “dead”, so consequently they cannot germinate/sprout. The fact that they do germinate provides clear, unequivocal proof that the “heat-sensitive enzymes are the life force” hypothesis is false. It also directly challenges the common raw food belief that foods heated above the temperature of 48° C/118° F are always “dead”. It further raises additional questions as to whether heat-sensitive enzyme content should ever be used as a proxy measure for assessing how “alive” a particular food is, i.e., as a measure of vitality.
Enzyme advocates may note the reduced germination rates for heat-treated seeds in the table, and equivocate and say that is proof that heating can reduce the vitality of the seed. The statement is partially valid but also irrelevant; it does not override the fact that the seed studies presented here disprove the enzyme hypothesis. Note also that the table is a summary and excludes details from some of the studies showing that heat treatment in some cases enhanced seed germination.
Other forms of heat-tolerant plant life. Seeds are not the only form of plant life resistant to high temperatures. Pollen shows similar tolerance of high temperatures. Exposure of Petunia pollen to 60° C/140° F for 2 days (also 75° C/167° F for 1 day) did not impair the ability of the pollen to set fruits. Nicotiana pollen exposed to 75°C/167° F for 6-12 hours was able to set seed (Rao et al., 1995). “The grass Dichanthelium lanuginosum can tolerate long-term soil temperatures up to 57°C [134.6° F]” (Daws et al., 2007, p. 265).
Heat-tolerant bacteria. Some species of bacteria – simple single-celled organisms whose bodies are mostly water and who lack cooling mechanisms – show remarkable heat tolerance. “A wide variety of bacteria thrive at temperatures from 70 to 90° C [158-194° F]” (Brock & Boylen, 1973). Heat-tolerant bacteria are found in natural hot water habitats (e.g., hot springs) and in artificial ones as well, including hot-water heaters. Bacteria that grow at temperatures above 100° C/212° F have been found in underwater volcanic thermal vents. Thermophilic (heat-loving) bacteria have thermostable (heat-stable or heat-tolerant) enzymes; an example is the enzyme pullulanase in Clostridium thermohydrosulfuricum, which functions optimally at a temperature of 90° C/194° F (Lowe et al., 1993).
Some seeds have heat-tolerant enzymes. The reality is that seeds and seedlings can contain enzymes that are stable above the temperature of 48° C/118° F. The paper by Eglington et al. (1998) is a suggested entry point for those interested in the related scientific literature. Will raw food enzyme advocates change their long-standing claims in response to this information, and assert that the heat-stable enzymes in foods are important? If they do so, is that equivalent to saying that “cooked” foods are as good as raw foods?
Scooby Tha Newbie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15/8/13
- Messages
- 397
- Reaction score
- 79
I don'know how to do links. But in this study it showed enzyme activity in barley seeds;Fourest et al., 1990
Barley:
Hordeum vulgare
71° C/159.8° F,
75° C/167.0° F,
84° C/183.2° F
11 days
7 days; root sprout>1 cm. to count
92%,
60%,
60%
Rates read from fig.2 in paper (note 2). 25 varieties in test.
Daws et al., 2007
Seeds held at 84degC for 11 days had a 60% germination rate. From my experiments with wet spent grain it showed a mellowing of the gluten. That was in non sour recipes.
Drying the spent grain should retard those enzymes to a point.
Barley:
Hordeum vulgare
71° C/159.8° F,
75° C/167.0° F,
84° C/183.2° F
11 days
7 days; root sprout>1 cm. to count
92%,
60%,
60%
Rates read from fig.2 in paper (note 2). 25 varieties in test.
Daws et al., 2007
Seeds held at 84degC for 11 days had a 60% germination rate. From my experiments with wet spent grain it showed a mellowing of the gluten. That was in non sour recipes.
Drying the spent grain should retard those enzymes to a point.
Scooby Tha Newbie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15/8/13
- Messages
- 397
- Reaction score
- 79
Well you did ask. I've read a csiro paper on bread enzymes after baking. I can't seem to find it atm.
Not For Horses
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 28/8/13
- Messages
- 901
- Reaction score
- 609
Mid week sourdough.
At least some good came of being off work sick
At least some good came of being off work sick
Mr. No-Tip
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26/9/11
- Messages
- 920
- Reaction score
- 277
I am off to a 'raw food feast' on Sunday. I suspect my jerky and oysters might buck the intention a little. The info above should be a good talking point.
tricache
Brewer/Gamer/Nerd
Technically bread...I made pretzels on the weekend and :icon_drool2: even the wife enjoyed them!
Liam_snorkel
كافر
- Joined
- 16/9/08
- Messages
- 5,800
- Reaction score
- 2,875
Nice job. I've always put them in the too hard basket.
Fabrizio
Member
Today I woke up at 5am. I had nothing to do until 8, so i made this simple and quick bread for my breakfast. 
tricache
Brewer/Gamer/Nerd
Actually pretty easy!Liam_snorkel said:
Got the recipe from one Brad @ Beersmith
http://beersmith.com/blog/2008/05/03/soft-pretzels-a-recipe-for-bavarian-pretzels/
DeGarre
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17/2/12
- Messages
- 209
- Reaction score
- 63
My third try with sourdough starter. I have now fed it for a week and it is bubbly. I took 2 cups of it and 3 cups of flour, and water, and started kneading and it quickly came together and incorporated, feeling very soft and airy.
I forgot the salt.
Started again, same measurements but with 2 tsp salt. This time it too longer to come together and it wasn't as soft. Could the salt do this?
Got there in the end. In both cases the dough smelled like a nice glass of buttermilk. Lovely!
Now the wait begins. I have earned to have a test bottle of my APA 4 days from bottling.
I forgot the salt.
Started again, same measurements but with 2 tsp salt. This time it too longer to come together and it wasn't as soft. Could the salt do this?
Got there in the end. In both cases the dough smelled like a nice glass of buttermilk. Lovely!
Now the wait begins. I have earned to have a test bottle of my APA 4 days from bottling.
Plastic Man
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4/11/04
- Messages
- 483
- Reaction score
- 0
New to bread-making...but have been baking a "no knead" loaf a few times a month the past few months. Been very surprised how easy it is and how well the bread turns out. Great crust and nice a chewy inside. been using cheap Aldi flour, a bit of salt and 1/4 teaspoon of yeast.
Scooby Tha Newbie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15/8/13
- Messages
- 397
- Reaction score
- 79
If you forget the salt again just make a slurry(3tsp water 2tsp salt) work this Thu your dough. Add a touch more flour if need be once mixed Thu. Salt is primarily for gluten development other reasons to add are shelf life,taste,moisture retaining,although @2%,3% if using a starter it's retarding of yeast is minimal.
*Above is a ratio not a recipe. 2:3.
The bread I've seen displayed here looks great.
*Above is a ratio not a recipe. 2:3.
The bread I've seen displayed here looks great.
OzPaleAle
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 8/4/13
- Messages
- 463
- Reaction score
- 122
Had a thought today about using a Lager Yeast(saccharomyces pastorianus) in bread.
I wonder if its preference for lower temperatures would allow it to work better for proving etc in colder melbourne months rather than the higher temp preferring S. Cerevisiae or is there some mechanism not present in the Lager yeast that the Ale yeasts have.
I wonder if its preference for lower temperatures would allow it to work better for proving etc in colder melbourne months rather than the higher temp preferring S. Cerevisiae or is there some mechanism not present in the Lager yeast that the Ale yeasts have.
