The Fresh Loaf

A Community of Amateur Bakers and Artisan Bread Enthusiasts.

Adding Wholegrain When Troubleshooting or Making A Starter Might Help

Abe's picture
Abe

Adding Wholegrain When Troubleshooting or Making A Starter Might Help

Adding Wholegrain When Troubleshooting or Making A Starter Might Help... but is it always for the reasons we believe. Sure using a wholegrain might help introduce yeast and bacteria in the beginning but once your starter has been made it's got an established colony of yeast and bacteria and shouldn't need anymore to be introduced. And why would these "new" yeast and bacteria fair any better than ones that have had time to take up home in a starter? However we do see it gives it a boost or might help to make a starter in faster time. 

Could it be that just like fibre is a prebiotic, in the gut, helping the probiotics so to here. The bacteria in your gut feeds off the fibre enabling the bacteria to multiply more efficiently. Might the same thing be happening when adding fibre, aka wholegrain, into a starter. Essentially you're adding a prebiotic rather than boosting it by adding more yeast and bacteria - aka probiotics? 

rondayvous's picture
rondayvous

I think the yeast and bacteria in the whole grain (rye or wheat) are both secondary to the additional nutrients. By providing a richer environment you encourage growth. Since the starter is heavily populated in a pre acidified environment your favored beasties should easily out compete whatever bad guys you introduce.

Abe's picture
Abe

I was just questioning some peoples reasoning why wholegrain is beneficial. It seems some people suggest we're adding in more microflora when in fact we're adding in more nutrients. 

mwilson's picture
mwilson

when you consider what the terms "fibre" and "prebiotic" mean in actual fact, you might think differently about how you pose that question!

fibre = carbohydrates; mono, di, tri, oglio and poly saccharides that we humans are unable to digest (metabolise).

prebiotic = food for a biological community

 

Abe's picture
Abe

According to many articles I have browsed wheat fibre is an excellent source of prebiotics. So my comment was rather than wholegrain adding in probiotics it may be beneficial more so because of its prebiotics. Feeding the micro flora already in the starter. 

mwilson's picture
mwilson

Yes, but what does prebiotic mean?

fibre is commonly classed into soluble and insoluble forms.

Abe's picture
Abe

as providing a healthy environment for probiotics to flourish. So probiotics are the yeast and bacteria and prebiotics boost the probiotics. 

mwilson's picture
mwilson

Sort of yes, but what remains is the contextualisation of the question, because the viewpoint is/was that of human nutrition, but then applied to microbes as I read it.

That doesn't make sense to me, again as I read it.

prebiotics are not some magical thing (quote "fibre enabling the bacteria to multiply more efficiently"). prebiotics are just simply food for gut bacteria. You are just feeding them with carbohydrates that that the human body is unable to metabolise.

mwilson's picture
mwilson

Not always a good thing btw! Some fibre (FODMAPS) can cause gas!

Abe's picture
Abe

From what i've seen (I may be wrong) is that many people suggest using wholegrain thinking because it's got the outer layer therefore more microbes are being added to the starter. 

I was proposing that it may be beneficial for another reason. Rather than adding more microbes the bran helps boost the microbes already in the starter. 

In other words in stead of adding a probiotic (as it were) we're kind of adding a prebiotic giving out starters a helping hand. So, food for the existing bacteria and not adding bacteria in. 

mwilson's picture
mwilson

You're not wrong Abe, just the understanding needed clarity.

Whole flour = more fibre (food for microbes and human roughage), more nutrients (proteins, minerals (mostly metals) and vitamins (unsynthesisable compounds)

Abe's picture
Abe

Food for the microflora. 

I may have misunderstood why people suggest adding wholegrain - i.e. more fibre, to boost their starters. Many often seem to be saying [I may be wrong] it's because we're adding in more microflora when in fact we're adding more food for the existing microbes. 

Thanks for confirming, Michael. 

 

mwilson's picture
mwilson

Sure, but I'm not sure you get my angle here:

"Could it be that just like fibre is a prebiotic, in the gut, helping the probiotics so to here. The bacteria in your gut feeds off the fibre enabling the bacteria to multiply more efficiently. Might the same thing be happening when adding fibre, aka wholegrain, into a starter. Essentially you're adding a prebiotic rather than boosting it by adding more yeast and bacteria - aka probiotics? "

The postulation as I read it seemed to be the premise what is good for the human body must be good for the microbes. Well yes to some degree, but my point is that they eat what they eat! Often carbs we cannot. They have different needs, they don't know what a prebiotic is, it's a human word and understanding.

Abe's picture
Abe

is that a starter and a human gut is different even though a starter contains yeast and bacteria that are beneficial to us, as gut bacteria, but it might not work the same way. A prebiotic is more about whether we can digest it and it might not be the same process happening inside a starter. 

mwilson's picture
mwilson

👍

Absolutely, the gut microbiome is certainly very different from a starter biome.

Abe's picture
Abe

Thank you, Michael. 

clevins's picture
clevins

From what I've read, whole wheat and rye simply have more nutrients for yeast to snack on. You'd need a lab analysis to quantify this with any precision. 

Abe's picture
Abe

Rather than adding more yeast and bacteria because it has the outer layer it's simply food for the existing bacteria. I was musing about the reasoning why it is good because i've often seen people suggest it acts like a probiotic. 

idaveindy's picture
idaveindy

Bread, 1st edition, page 364, section "Amylase activity and the question of Malt". 

Whole grain flour has more enzymes than white flour, and therefore makes sugar (by breaking down the starch) faster than white flour, even when white flour has some enzymes added at the mill (usually malted barley flour in the US).

Page 367, section "Ash Content", speaks of the minerals in ash (whole grains have more ash than white flour) causing a much higher rate of fermentation.

 

Abe's picture
Abe

And sheds a new light as why it's beneficial. 

Thank you, Dave. I've got the book and while i've done many of the recipes I haven't read it cover to cover. Perhaps it may be a good idea to work my way through the book rather than picking out random recipes.

mwilson's picture
mwilson

More enzymes for sure but be careful about attributing that to faster amylolytic activity.

As I am sure I have said before US and NA flour is malted due to environmental growing conditions which result in grain flour with a high falling number. Whole versus white is not the reason.

idaveindy's picture
idaveindy

In NA, only white flour is malted.  At least I've never seen whole grain wheat flour with added malt/enzymes.

I don't have references handy, but going by memory, whole grain wheat flour has noticeably lower Falling Numbers than malted white flour.

mwilson's picture
mwilson

I think you have misbelieved something for a long time!

KA whole wheat bread flour falling number = >350 seconds

idaveindy's picture
idaveindy

Erma gerd.  

So it's the minerals that boost the fermentation?

mwilson's picture
mwilson

Malt flour (or it's enzymes) may be added to bread flour and is commonly done so in NA to standardise its fermentation performance and this practice has been commonplace for decades.

Wheat grown in hot and dry climates can provide high quality and high protein wheat however in such conditions the wheat is generally amylase (alpha) deficient.

The intention of malt supplementation has never been to put back something it lost through refinement as is the case with flour Enrichment (US) / Fortification (UK). Perhaps knowledge of was part of the confusion?

Malt supplementation is more like using an acidity regulator to adjust a quality parameter, e.g., in tinned (canned) tomatoes citric acid is used to adjust the pH, as riper tomatoes are less acidic, and pH is an important food safety control.

Wholewheat (wholemeal) flour does appear to show more rapid fermentation activity but falling number tests - the rate at which starch is converted to sugar, do not demonstrate markedly different / lower falling numbers.

Wholewheat flour will certainly contain more enzymes compared to refined (white) flour. But that list is long incl. Lipase, xylanase, protease, amylase classes to name few, each with varying types.

It’s worth noting that all possible enzymes are not all available and many occur in bound form, attached to other constituents within the kernel. However, when the grain is allowed to germinate there is a chain of enzymatic activity that then releases more enzymes, including amylase, hence the use of malted barley flour.

The exact explanation or attribution for perceived faster fermentation with wholewheat I’m not entirely sure but I can speculate…

E.g., The release of simple sugars from non-starch polysaccharides.

The higher level of minerals in wholewheat is no doubt beneficial to microorganisms, but I wouldn’t say that it was the sole driving factor.

rondayvous's picture
rondayvous

As we all know, if one takes grains of wheat and add water the grains can germinate (malt). Mother nature gets to work and quickly starts converting starch into sugars and begins the process of converting a grain into vegetation.

White flour is mostly the starch. With a lot of the enzymes from the rest of the grain removed in the milling process we add diastatic malt to aid the conversion of starch to sugar so the yeast will be happy. 

When we add water to whole grain, everything that was there in the intact grain is there in the flour. I would think the milling process accelerates the conversion of starch to sugar since the components are no longer bound up in their container (the grain).

There is a limit to how much malt one can add to white flour, as anyone that has tried to use sprouted flour is well aware of. There is a reason one cannot make bread from fully malted flour.

So for me the question is not so much why whole grain adds sugars and extra food to a starter, but why whole grain doesn’t turn into a sugary soupy mix.

mwilson's picture
mwilson

Depending on the flour and its intrinsic amylase activity diastase addition isn't always optimal.

Over time industrial baking and the use of testing has determined what is an optimal falling number target for flour destined to be used for bread [Nothing like speeding up the process to save money]. Growing conditions (climate and soil) affect the properties of the grain. Wheat grown in a maritime climate such as in the UK will not need to be supplemented with additional amylase enzymes.

Essentially malt is used to standardise flour performance but is also used a flour improver, because it speeds up what would occur anyway. As I explained previously the difference in falling number between wholewheat and white flour of the same grain is negligible. Furthermore, wheat is not typically deficient in beta amylase (this enzyme is located mostly in the endosperm), and does most of the work to release maltose, alpha amylase primarily releases dextrins from free starches.

Clearly malted wheat flour and wholewheat do not perform the same nor do they have the same composition. So, the deduction that everything that was there in the intact grain is there in the flour can’t be exactly true with respect to its functional parts. During milling shear forces and heat damage starches and proteins, but a certain amount of damaged starch is needed for fermentation. The remaining starch granules are left relatively untouched during fermentation and the finished bread is comprised mostly of this starch portion which during heat from baking then gels.

The many enzymes that are released during germination are bound to other constituents such as starches and other proteins and therefore not all these enzymes are available when the ungerminated (sound) grain has been milled, far from it! Milling doesn’t release every functional part because flour particles are a finite size.

rondayvous's picture
rondayvous

So the disassociation of the enzymes from their constituent parts, mechanical damage and heat is what results in the different chemical changes to the starches after adding water to whole grain vs whole flour? 

I’ve recently started making bread with sprouted whole wheat and rye flour using recipes from Reinhardt’s book “bread revolution”. A much different starting point that regular flours, I’ve been wondering about optimal PH levels in an already weakened gluten dough.