May 4, 2020 - 6:30am
Remove bran, then replace
Has anyone removed the bran from a wholemeal flour (by sieving) created a dough then added the bran back in as you would seeds into a loaf? I understand the benefit is that you can create the gluten without the bran cutting into it. So in theory the dough would be stronger and better able to support the bran thus making the loaf lighter.
I'm going to try but thought I'd see if anyone has done this.
Share
Typically, when it's done, people soak the bran, both to allow it hydrate and to control phytic acid.
Nicks, I have done it a few times, not sure I saw enough benefit to justify the time, but have a friend who did it regularly. Her understanding of the theory was that when the bran was left in, it would cut the gluten, when sifted out, and added back as a group, it was contained in a smaller area, and thus did not cut the gluten as much as when spread throughout the dough - not sure if that is right, but that is what i remember.
I used to sift the bran and hydrate it separately in part of the recipe water, boiled, and then add it back. It was kind of neat to see the bran get huge and fluffy but it didn't make my bread any better. These days I just autolyse my flour with water for at least an hour, or often overnight, before adding salt. It works beautifully and the gluten develops just fine. If I'm using yeast water to leaven the dough I do the autolyse step in the fridge to hold off the fermentation until the gluten and the bran both have a chance to hydrate.
I can get a nice dough from even relatively coarsely-milled, unsifted flour in this way.