maria lorraine's Profile
Mmmm. That sure sounds good -- the soup and wine.
I've had quite a few Sagrantinos that have been medium-bodied, certainly not heavier than Morellino. The Caprai seems unlike any other Sagrantino I've had: inky, overoaked, heavy, overwhelming the grape, and taking much too long to resolve and become drinkable. I wish they didn't make the wine in that style.
I'm really loving Diet Frostop. The regular Frostop is probably my favorite overall too, having tasted about 30 or so in the past two years.
I've had previous releases. Pretty stuff.
Yes, Rombauer is known for ripe reds with a bit of residual sugar. This is actual sweetness along with lots of fruit extraction.
(Their Chardonnay is quite well-known for lots of malolactic butteriness and residual sugar.)
And, in Merlot, Pride Mountain. First one that came to mind.
Druhr, I'd seek out Zinfandels or Merlots with fruit ripeness and a touch of residual sugar (RS). Please seek out a quality wine store and speak with someone who knows their stuff.
Alternately, you can order the Rombauer and Pride wines to be shipped to Mississippi. I went to wine-searcher and didn't have much luck finding them at a retailer in MS. But please ask around.
Thanks to you, Melanie, I have visited a half-dozen or more locations on this thread, and have been so happy. It's a joy to buy fresh eggs, even more to eat them, even more to create and eat baked goods made with them.
Plus, I find that I inevitably buy more than one dozen, and a dozen fresh eggs work well as a token hostess gift.
Many thanks for the thread. I need to get out a big map, and mark the locations with Post-It flags.
I have not been able to go back to regular storebought eggs.
Margaret, welcome to Chowhound.
For questions like yours, competely unrelated to the thread topic, it's best if you begin a new thread. Please flag your own post, and ask the Moderators to move it into a new thread, and suggest a title for it.
Alternately, you can go to the Home Cooking board and post this new topic there.
You probably won't get much attention to your question here since it's buried at the bottom of the thread and off-topic.
Hope you find what you need.
I did the same search, zin1953, and was confused also.
The thiourea test (PROP strips) has been mis-sold. It only tests for thiourea sensitivity, not sensitivity to all bitter flavors or sensitivity overall. It really only means on thing -- sensitivity to thiourea. Sensitivity to thiourea by no means can be interpreted as an enhanced sensitivity to all flavors, or increased acuity. Moreover, sensitivity to thiourea is based on a specific genetic sequencing. You either have that, or you don't.
There are so many variables in bread baking!
I find the most variation in flavor, from sourdough, perhaps as much as the flour choice (type of flour, organic, winter/summer, red/white, etc.) comes from varying the fermentation temperature.
A little geeky, but...
The lactobacilli in bread starters come in two main subtypes. Most of sourdough's flavor and leavening come from the heterofermentative type of lactobacillus, which pumps out acetic acid (vinegar, for sourness) as a by-product and favors a temp below 82-85 degrees F.
The other type of lactobacillus -- homofermentative -- pumps out the lactic acid (more mellow and complex than acetic acid) and does its thing above 82-85 F.
So, a long cool fermentation increases sourness. By controlling the temp of the starter and dough, you control the type of lactobacillus that has the upper hand in fermentation, thereby controlling the final flavor and sourness of the bread.
There's a lot of confusion that says lactobacillus is lactobacillus and yeast is yeast. The truth is that there are thousands of both, and just because one makes kefir or yogurt does not mean at all it will work in sourdough. The grain has the lactobacilli and wild yeast that you need, and they are adapted to work with grain, not dairy. Just like the bacteria used to make yogurt/kefir and other cultured dairy products are specifically adapted to work well with dairy, and either consumer lactose or split the lactose into its two components, glucose and galactose.
It's best to use the lactobacilli that are *already* adapted to work on dairy or flour.
I might add, though, that using whey or yogurt or even a small amount of milk in making bread results in very tender bread. I know this to be true in my own regular bread-baking, having experimented greatly with the same recipe with the only change being a small amount of dairy. That does not mean the dairy bacteria it has any effect on the sourdough bacterial fermentation.
Manufacturers use commercial yeast to fake sourdough and often add vinegar to fake the sourdough tang. Since sourdough lactobacilli produce acetic acid as well as lactic acid, they can legally add vinegar, but no doubt doing so is deception from both marketing and manufacturing standpoints. It's not a true sourdough.
Different flours have different levels of bacteria and yeast for producing sourdough. Rye has the most, so even if you're planning on making white bread or whole wheat bread, begin your starter with rye, and feed it periodically with rye, alternating with other flours.
Here's a link to a lot of good Sourdough FAQs, that discuss techniques and bacteria/yeast and all sort of other good things. It's not fancy, but useful:
Interesting post, funny, even.
And thanks for the great Tartine bread link.
Got any links for that fermentation stuff related to lower glycemic response and the "first stage of digestion"?
Would love to read to see if current studies back this up. The interwebs being what they are, and all.
That's a low range for Napa Cabs, just so you know. It's rare to find one worth recommending in that price range.
You've completely misunderstood. I wasn't replying to you. I'm guessing from your post that you replied without reading the scientific article.
Artichokes contain two powerful coagulants. The use of coagulants results in curds. That means cheese. Cottage cheese, farmer cheese, pot cheese, queso blanco, junket, what have you. Cheese.
Whether or not an extract is used doesn't matter -- the coagulants are in the water-based extract and in the artichokes themselves. But making a water-based extract from artichokes and using that to coagulate milk is how cheese has been made for centuries. The scientific analysis of what happens when milk is coagulated using artichokes doesn't change if an extract is used.
If there weren't coagulants, there might be some lactobacilli action taking the lead from the beginning. If that had happened, a Lactic Acid Bacteria-cultured product might have been produced, and, depending on the LAB involved, that might have been yogurt.
But that wasn't the case, in the scientific analysis of the milk treated with artichokes.
I agree that the product made is a soft cheese not yogurt.
The Artichoke (botanical name Cynara cardunculus ) has been used to make cheese for centuries. The artichoke flowers are made into an extract, and that liquid extract is added to the milk to coagulate it.
This article identifies the protease enzymes in artichokes as coagulants, and lactobacilli, lactococci, enterococci, streptococci and yeasts as ripening agents.
Read it to learn more. Pay particular attention to what appears when.
"Bacterial dynamics in a raw cow’s milk Caciotta cheese manufactured with aqueous extract of Cynara cardunculus dried flowers."
Yes, many plants contain a rennet that will coagulate milk. Coagulation does not mean fermentation has taken place, though, which for milk would be the conversion of lactose into lactic acid, either directly or by splitting lactose into glucose and galactose. And even if fermentation has happened, it does not mean yogurt is the result; some other cultured milk product may be the result instead. This relates to the OP and what is produced using pepper stems.
<<<Bottom line, I am erudite enough to be discerning about both what is and is not said in an article. Such as your statement "It's an article about SOURDOUGH MICROBIOLOGY." >>>
If you're as erudite and discerning as you say you are, you wouldn't say I've written something I haven't. I've NEVER WRITTEN those words ANYWHERE in this thread.
<<but a scientifically rigorous article on sourdough microbiology it is not. It obviously was not meant to be such>>
I never said anywhere it was. That doesn't mean the quote or the cereal biochemist is not credible.
Besides, that quote is more informed than anything you've given. Where is the scientific proof FROM YOU that backs up your claim that wild yeasts from grapes are found in a sourdough starter? At least the quote I've provided is from a cereal scientist and on topic.
I've provided you with links to MANY RIGOROUS SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES on sourdough microbiology. Why not read some of them?
Waiting on the scientific references and links!
You are making the discussion exceedingly tedious and argumentative.
Certainly appears you just want to argue without reading more citations and scientific literature.
So, let's keep the discussion based in science, using scientific sources and links to those sources. That will make the conversation less personal, and we both will learn credible information.
<<<IN fact it is from an multi author article on sourdough bread making and only glancingly mentions yogurt at all. One phrase mentions yogurt as an example and draws no conclusions about yogurt>>
It's a specific quote from a cereal biochemist about using grapes to begin a starter. Would LOVE to read your scientific sources on the validity of using the yeast on grapes to populate a resident sourdough colony.
That quote is NOT EVEN SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT YOGURT. You didn't expect a quote from a cereal scientist to be about yogurt, did you???
Even so, this cereal biochemist has an understanding of bacterial colonies, whether in sourdough or starters.
If you have a specific quote FROM A SCIENTIFIC SOURCE on the VALIDITY of using grapes in starters and those yeasts becoming part of the starter’s permanent resident colony, like you claim, bring it on!! Haven't read anything like that you.
Until then, I'm going to trust the expertise of this cereal biochemist over anecdotal claims.
< In fact hes says "I DO NOT CLAIM TO KNOW what exactly is resident in their starters and whether any organisms they introduce from the grape actually survive and are viable over time" (emphasis added) I find that you are drawing conclusions from this source that simply are not stated by Roland.>>
All that means he has not put each household's individual starter through an analysis.
It does NOT mean that the same colony of resident bacteria and yeasts has not been discovered in sourdough starters from all over the world.
I'm sure you read in Ganzle's articles that the colony of bacteria and yeasts is consistent no matter where it is found in the world, with minute variations. (That explains the minor SF flavor variation, if you think it exists. The flavor variation could just as easily be explained by a difference in fermentation temperatures since sourdough LB produce different flavors depending on temperature.)
You did take the time to read Ganzle's articles before attacking what I wrote, right? You wanted links -- I gave them to you.
I also gave you links to many other articles on sourdough microbiology. When you read them, I'd love to read your rebuttal using quotes from scientific sources, with links.
How about Debra Wink, the bread biochemist? Did you get a chance to read the articles at her website? Again, I gave you the link. I'd love to read your rebuttal of my statements using the bread biochemistry references from Wink.
<<Both what he says and DOES NOT say in this article are interesting. You say "Yes, there are differences across batches and regions, but there is a definitive core colony group for both sourdough starters and yogurt but this article simply does not support that. >>
Well, that one quote is only one source related to using grapes and starters. Again, it's not even supposed to be about yogurt -- it's about SOURDOUGH.
Speaking of yogurt, did you dive in and take the time to read about cultured milk genomes and resident colonies??? Your post reveals you probably haven't.
Did you research the bacteria responsible for each yogurt and yogurt-like cultured milk product? I have.
Did you read about the bacteria on pepper stems and find any correlation with those and the bacteria found in yogurt or yogurt-like products?
When you're ready to discuss specifics –
and can reference scientific sources with links
Until then, it appears you want to nitpick and argue without doing the actual reading of scientific research.
So, let’s keep the conversation based in scientific references. I welcome the reading of the research at the links you provide. I love to learn. Bring it on, VillyCarl!
<<or is that just a "metro" sort of thing?>>
Nope. I've read about the physics of wine bubbles, and how flavor hitches a ride on bubbles, so you want fewer of them bursting before they're in the mouth. And a wine glass is best for the least bubble loss (least flavor loss). The coupe is the worst. I still won't turn down a flute - hardly!
Regarding using grapes and starter:
My source for my previous statement on using grapes for a starter, and why not to do that, is Roland Saldanha, a cereal molecular biologist.
Saldanha deals in protein expression, protein purification and characterization. He has extensive experience with RNA, RNA/DNA protein interactions and aptamer selection.
Here is what he has written on using grapes in starters, and on yogurt:
"I am also skeptical of grape based starters, etc. I know Nancy Silverton and other celebrated bakers advocate this but I can see no logic in it.
"Grapes indeed have yeast and lactobacilli on them. The problem is these particular varieties of yeast and lactobacilli have never been recovered in any sourdough starter that has been examined from any place in the world.
"These organisms are undoubtedly specific to grapes as certain other lactobacilli are specific to YOGURT. There are hundreds of strains of yeasts and equally large numbers of lactobacilli. These organisms develop niches where they thrive. To transplant an organism from one natural environment to another is not a formula for success. It is like taking a polar bear and putting it in the desert. There are hundreds of cheeses made based on very small differences in starter cultures and processing.
"These people are undoubtedly celebrated bakers but to them a yeast is yeast and a yeast on a grape is a "wild yeast" and they have no understanding of any of the nuances. I do not claim to know what exactly is resident in their starters and whether any organisms they introduce from the grape actually survive and are viable over time (years as opposed to weeks)."
So, while we think that wild organisms may begin a starter or make yogurt, what really counts is the RESIDENT colony of the ongoing starter or batch of yogurt.
Yes, there are differences across batches and regions, but there is a definitive core colony group for both sourdough starters and yogurt. As well as for every other cultured milk product.
If you've got quotable material from a biochemist that refutes this, I'd love to read it. But anecdotal stuff won't cut it.
So, we may think we can use pepper stems to make yogurt (IIRC the lactobacillus is plantarum), but what is the colony of resident bacteria?
Is it roughly the same as the definitive core group of yogurt bacteria? Is it really yogurt or something like yogurt?
I don't have the answer, and until we get a microbiological analysis of the bacteria, none of us know whether pepper stems are making yogurt or something similar to yogurt.
There are genome analyses of cultured milk products that prove that this core group of bacteria exists for each cultured milk product. I'm referring to the core colony of resident bacteria found in household cultured milk products all over the world, not commercially produced products.
The colony for traditional household yogurt is quite different from viila and different still from Filmjölk, which is more cheese-y. But both are generically called "yogurt."
Also in the generic yogurt pantheon is Matsoni, but it is not considered yogurt by some. (Don't talk to me about it; do your own research on its colony of bacteria). Different still is Piimä.
Each have these yogurt-like products have a definitive flavor, texture and distinct bacteriological signature. But are they yogurt?
Should they be called yogurt if they don't have yogurt's core colony of resident bacteria? If they don't have yogurt's genome? That is what I have been getting at.
I believe the scientists would say, "It can walk/talk/act like a duck, but if it doesn't have the genome of a duck, it's not a duck. It's something else."
That 1971 article was what began my interest in sourdough microbiology. I pored over Sugihara's and Klein's articles. I interviewed Miller twice. Those are the three authors of that study.
That info from 1971 has been added onto, and superceded, by later writings on sourdough microbiology. 44 years was a long time ago.
The main sourdough yeast was identified as candida milleri, in later writings, and named after the Miller in the study you cited, the scientist I interviewed.
Michael G. Gänzle is an excellent current source. I'm mainly quoting him and his research on sourdough microbiology.
Here's something more current:
"Modeling of Growth of Lactobacillus sanfranciscensis and Candida milleri in Response to Process Parameters of Sourdough Fermentation?
More articles by Michael G. Gänzle:
<<Also, the bacteria involved in SF sourdough is partly to credit for its uniqueness. Just sayin.'>>
If you had read this thread, or any of my other posts/threads on sourdough microbiology, you would realize you are preaching to the choir. I've long said, quoting Gänzle and other sourdough microbiologists, that it is the Lactobacillus sanfranciscensis that does most of the work in providing flavor and leavening to sourdough bread.
Debra Wink, whose website is The Fresh Loaf, is another biochemist who specializes in sourdough chemistry. I have quoted her also, and read many of her reference articles. Read here on the role of Lactobacillus sanfranciscensis in lactic acid fermentation in sourdough:
More about yeasts:
More here, this from Wikipedia:
[Ganzles is the source on that.]
"The perfect yeast S. exiguus is related to the imperfect yeasts C. milleri and C. holmii. Torulopsis holmii, Torula holmii, and S. rosei are synonyms used prior to 1978. C. milleri and C. holmii are physiologically similar, but DNA testing established them as distinct. Other yeasts reported found include C. humilis, C. krusei, Pichia anomaola, C. peliculosa, P. membranifaciens, and C. valida. There have been changes in the taxonomy of yeasts in recent decades. L. sanfranciscensis prefers to consume maltose, while C. milleri is maltase negative and cannot consume maltose. C. milleri can grow under conditions of low pH and relatively-high acetate levels, a factor contributing to sourdough flora's stability.
"In order to produce acetic acid, L. sanfrancisensis needs maltose and fructose. Wheat dough contains abundant starch and some polyfructosanes, which enzymes degrade to "maltose, fructose and little glucose." The terms "fructosan, glucofructan, sucrosyl fructan, polyfructan, and polyfructosan" are all used to describe a class of compounds that are "structurally and metabolically" related to sucrose, where "carbon is stored as sucrose and polymers of fructose (fructans)." Yeasts have the ability to free fructose from glucofructans which compose about 1-2% of the dough. Glucofructans are long strings of fructose molecules attached to a single glucose molecule. Sucrose can be considered the shortest glucofructan, with only a single fructose molecule attached. When L. sanfrancisensis reduces all available fructose, it stops producing acetic acid and begins producing ethanol. If the fermenting dough gets too warm, the yeasts slow down, producing less fructose. Fructose depletion is more of a concern in doughs with lower enzymatic activities."
Read the excellent list of references, and then read the actual citations at:
Thanks for the pics. Looks refreshing and Indian Summer-y.
I have read a great deal of research on sourdough microbiology, and it's an established fact now (among the microbiologists) that no yeast or bacteria that make a sourdough starter actually come from the air. This is a myth. San Francisco sourdough -- that it can only be made in the SF Bay Area -- is also a myth. Everything the starter needs is already on the flour or grain. While there may be some yeast or bacteria from the air that populate a starter, they are not adapted to work with flour and are not in sufficient number to have any effect on the the starter unless it's very very minor.
When sourdough starters (or simply starters) from all the world were analyzed, they ALL were found to have the characteristic "San Francisco" yeast and bacteria. Those yeast and bacteria were first discovered in the Bay Area -- everyone wondered what made SF sourdough taste the way it did, and a group of scientists discovered what -- microbiologically -- was going on. As part of my work, I interviewed the scientists who were first responsible for identifying the yeast and bacteria.
As far as any "pre-digestion" goes, making it easier on the stomach and any rise in blood sugar, I'd love to see some hard data on this, but in spite of a lot of scientific reading, I haven't come across it.
In fact, there are several scientific papers that sourdough bacteria/yeast/enzymes actually contribute to or cause cereal (grain, wheat, etc.) allergy. I just did a journal search to find scientific articles on this "pre-digestion" stuff and found nothing.
Kefir, like yogurt, requires specific bacteria, and so allowing unpasteurized milk to sit and "allow the good guys [to} proliferate" will often result in the terrible guys proliferating (the same thing happens when you make cheese) and in a terrible tasting product, first, and, not infrequently, a product that will make you and your family ill. Along with the "good guys" in raw milk are always bad guys too -- give either the appropriate warmth and both teams will start growing. Which one dominates is a wild card.
The same thing happens with fermenting grapes into wine -- you really need to control what yeasts (or bacteria) are allowed to take hold. Essentially, when culturing any dairy product, you're acting like a bouncer at a bar -- keeping out the bad guys, and allowing the good guys to hang out.
It's best to be *extremely* careful with whatever you're doing with raw milk -- especially in terms of scrupulous cleanliness -- and to always inoculate with a specific culture. I buy raw milk to make cheese and other cultured dairy products, and know of whence I speak.
I am all for everyone making homemade yogurt
and for making sourdough
but it's important to know a smattering of the science so you don't miscommunicate or make mistakes and waste food dollars, or worse, make someone ill.
<<Your experience is directly opposite of all of mine! I've made ice cream in a restaurant setting for 15 years, and have always used about half heavy cream (36-40% fat) and half whole milk in my custard.>>
We're not in disagreement. 50% heavy cream and 50% whole milk is an excellent ratio. A good deal more than 50% (75% to 100%) results in ice cream that is mousse-like. Years ago, when I worked in a professional setting, I made ice cream under a brilliant pastry chef and used professional machines. That was when I learned of the textural mousse-like problem I spoke of. The ice cream was of a normal sweetness so the softness was not due to excess sugar, or for that matter, over-run. Like I said, 50% heavy cream is fine -- wonderful, in fact, and I recommend that.
Some broken barrels. Some bungs held, some did not.
Use the incredible wine concierge at Meritage. Her name is Sharon.
Yes, Bistro don Giovanni is still good. Farmstead is good also. I love eating outside there.
I don't understand.
1. Sourdough is loaded with yeast. And bacteria that act just like yeast.
2. Doesn't yeast die during baking, as The Professor says?
3. Usually elimination diets eliminate wheat also. I don't understand why any form of bread (even that made with baking soda and not yeast/sourdough) would be allowed during the diet's elimination phase. Even bread made with rye, spelt, farro, corn, other flours.
4. There are 1500 species of yeast. They are very different from one another. The yeast you bake with is far different from the yeasts on fruit. So, if the diet says to eliminate the entire family of yeast, fruit is out too.
5. The yeasts used for bread and on fruit are very different from the yeast in the body. So can there be any relationship between the yeast you eat and yeast growth in the body (candida albicans, etc.) since they're vastly different species?
Lots of scam reports and quack alerts on the LEAP diet and MRT. Because so much does not add up logically.