KitchenSavvy

Do You Need Sugar in Bread Recipes

In response to my previous posting Breadmaker Jewish Rye Bread, SeaBee asked:

Shouldn't there be some sugar involved somewhere?

Now, I'm not sure if this is a specific questions because SeaBee thinks that Jewish Rye Bread should be sweet(er), or a more general question like:

I notice in your posting on Breadmaker Jewish Rye Bread there is no sugar.  I thought that yeast needs sugar to digest in order for the bread to rise.  How can a bread recipe work if there is no sugar in it?

--SeaBee

 

I have chosen to answer the second question.

You are right that yeast digests sugar and produces carbon dioxide and alcohol, both of which contribute to the rise on bread.  And, yes, many recipes use sugar (white or brown) or honey or some other sugar to feed the yeast, but that is not the only source of sugar.

By weight, bread flour is about 72% starch, 12% protein, and 13% water.  The rest is made up of some sugar, minerals, fiber and other matter.  All-purpose will contain a slightly higher proportion of starch, and cake flour even more.  Starch is nothing more than a long chain of sugar molecules joined together in a string to make one larger molecule.

Wheat flour also contains two important enzymes, amylase and diastase, that convert starch to sugars that the yeast can digest, so even without adding sugar it is possible to get the bread to rise.  Many bread recipes  such as traditional baguette and pizza are made simply with flour,water, yeast and salt, and no sugar at all.  Other recipes add diastatic malt, which contains diastase to encourage a faster breakdown of starch to sugar.

Many commercial bread flours contain added enzymes to encourage the breakdown of starch to sugar.

As explained in Raising Bread, recipes made without sugar usually take longer to rise and tend to develop more complex flavors than doughs made with sugar.

---

 

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com

Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

Bundt Strike Out

I have a "non stick" Bundt pan but of course I grease it every time, usually spray it with baking spray until it can't take anymore, then do it again before I put the cake in.  For some reason though, the past couple times the cake has been glued to the sides of the pan and I ultimately had to scoop it out of the pan and call it a crumble cake. Is there a better way to do this?

--Abigail

I am guessing that the problem you have is a build up of dried oil on the inside of the Bundt pan that is now making it more like super-stick rather than non-stick.  I have seen this happen with cooking sprays on non-stick frying pans.

If you have ever seasoned a cast iron frying pan, you might have noticed that once the pan cools down the oil has turned from a liquid to a thick, gummy or even hard surface.  This drying effect is caused by the oxidation of specific bonds in the fatty acids that make up the oil.  This results in cross-linking of those fatty acids which in turn makes the oil either harden into a film or turn thick and gummy.

Several factors can influence the amount of oil that builds up from your spray, including the type of oil in the spray, the amount used and the temperature at which it is used.  It is recommended that only a very light layer of spray be used, as shown in the video below.  From your description, you are using quite a lot more spray than is recommended. 

Also, you need to be sure that you are using a spray that is specifically designed for baking and one that contains flour as a releasing agent.  Regular cooking spray will not work properly.

Unfortunately, once you start to get a film of oil there is probably no way to return the pan to its original non-stick condition.  Any effort to remove the extra layer will likely damage the non-stick coating underneath.  You might try using it as if it was a normal (not non-stick) pan by coating it with butter or vegetable shortening and then dusting it with flour and shaking out the excess.  If that doesn't work, the pan is likely destined for the dustbin.

---

 

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com

Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

 

Brown Sugar Substitution

I was going to make Peanut Butter Cookies as a treat today, but found that I don't have any brown sugar.  Can I just substitute plain white sugar instead?

-Paula-

Yes, you can substitute plain white sugar in place of the brown sugar, but you will find that the texture of the finished product will be slightly different and that the cookies will likely remain crisper.  Brown sugar is hygroscopic, meaning that it will absorb moisture from the air.  Over time cookies made with brown sugar become softer.

Alternatively, if you have molasses on hand, you can make the equivalent of brown sugar by using white sugar and molasses.  In fact, modern brown sugar is simply that -- white sugar which is blended with varying amounts of molasses.

To substitute for one cup of light brown sugar, use one cup of granulated sugar plus one or two tablespoons of molasses.  To substitute for one cup dark brown sugar, use a cup of granulated sugar plus two or three tablespoons of molasses.  The exact amount of molasses will depend in part on whether you are using a light or dark molasses.  Light molasses is sometimes called fancy molasses.

The sugar and molasses can simply be added to the recipe without needing to premix them.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

Now That You Ask ... or Substituting Agave Nectar for Sugar

I frequently receive questions from readers about how to change a recipe.  They may want to substitute ingredients, reduce calories, or make  the recipe "healthier" in one way or another.  The problem is, they send me the question without the recipe they are hoping to change and expect me to somehow be able to know the context.  Think of it like calling a restaurant you have heard about and asking, "How do I get to your place?"  You know that the first thing they are going to ask is, "Where are you now?"  They can't tell you how to get from here to there unless they know where here is to begin with.

For example, I recently got this question:

I have a cake recipe from Georges Perrier, Le Bec Fin, Philadelphia, that uses 1T baking powder and 1 tsp baking soda with 3/4 cup buttermilk and 1/2 cup good quality bourbon (Bourbon spice cake).  It's delicious as formulated.  I am substituting agave nectar (a low glycemic index liquid sweetener) for the sugar, which also requires reducing the liquid in the cake by 1/3.  If the target ratio is 1/2 tsp baking soda to 1 c buttermilk, and baking soda is four times as strong as baking powder, then presumably I need 2 cups of acid, not the 1.25 cups of the recipe??  I'm worried about reducing the liquid that much.  The other liquid is 3 eggs, easy enough.  Any suggestions?

Now, I'm not about to publish the recipe, or tell people that so and so eats vast amounts of Bourbon Spice Cake, any more than the new restaurant is going to take out billboards telling everyone your address, but it would sure help understand the context in which the question is asked.  It might even allow me to test my suggested fix in the kitchen to be sure I'm on the right track.

Without the recipe, the best I can do is assume some common reference point -- "Drive to the front of City Hall, and then go right six blocks to highway 16 ..."  Of course, those kinds of instructions may be way out of your way, and may not really help if you live in Podunk and I'm in East Eyebrow.

So, having no mile markers to tell me where the recipe is coming from, what can I say about the above question?

1. General recommendations are to replace the sugar with about 2/3 the volume of agave nectar.  Since agave nectar is supposedly sweeter than sugar, you need less of it.
2. Because agave nectar contains water, most substitutions require that you reduce the other liquids in the recipe.  Depending on what type of sugar is being replaced, the amount may vary between about 1/4 and 1/3 of the volume of agave nectar used. 
3. If you are replacing liquid sweeteners like honey or corn syrup, the ratios and the changes in amounts of other liquids may vary.
4. Substitution guidelines recommend reducing the oven temperature by 25°F (12°C) and increasing the cooking time slightly.

If your recipe, for example, calls for 1 1/2 cups of white sugar, then you need to use about 0.666 X 1.5 = 1 cups of agave nectar.  You also need to reduce the amount of other liquid in the recipe by 1/3 of 1 cup.  Now comes the problem, where to get that third of a cup of liquid.  If you take out 1/3 cup the bourbon, it's no longer going to be much of a Bourbon Spice Cake.  If you take out the 1/3 cup from the buttermilk, you may need to reduce the amount of baking soda by a proportional amount, just over half the total, but there may be other ingredients that are reacting with some of the baking soda, so you may not need to reduce it by that much.  If you reduce the number of eggs, then the structure of the cake may change.

There could be two other ways out of the conundrum about how to change the amount of liquid.  One depends on knowing the entire recipe.  Start by working out the ratio of flour to liquid in the recipe, remembering that butter is around 20% water by volume, each whole egg contains only about 3 tablespoons water (the rest is protein and fat), and that the buttermilk is between 1% to 2% fat.  Armed with this information, you have another option, which is to increase the amount of flour in proportion to the amount of excess liquid in the agave nectar.  A typical spice cake might have around the same weight of flour as liquids, so compensating for 1/3 cup too much water could just as easily be dealt with by increasing the amount of flour in the recipe by 5.3 ounces weight or around 1/2 cup.  Chances are that adding a half cup of flour wouldn't be right either, since that would change the ratios on spices, etc., but adding a 1/4 cup of flour and reducing the liquid by 2 tablespoons could very well work out, maybe without even needing to change any of the other ingredients.

Finally, you could cut the buttermilk by the required amount, in this example 1/3 cup, and then add buttermilk powder to replace it.  Since buttemilk powder is used in a 1 to 4 ratio with water, adding 4 teaspoons of buttermilk powder would compensate for the amount of real buttermilk taken out and should balance the recipe back up.  The water from the agave nectar will make up for the liquid lost in reducing the amount of real buttermilk used.

All of this assumes that the cake contains 1 1/2 cup of white sugar in the first place, which I don't know for sure. 

The point is a) messing around with the balances on ingredients can be fussy work and b) without having the whole recipe, it's hard to know how to change it.  The more information you give about where you are starting from, the easier it is to tell you the directions to get where you want to be.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

Easter Bunny Cake Icing

For Easter, I am planning to make an Easter Bunny cake.  My problem is that I can never get bright, vibrant color in my icing.  It always turns out a pale pastel color instead.  How can I get brighter colors?

--Tony

Your problem is likely that you are using the liquid food coloring that is available at most supermarkets and grocery stores.  This coloring is so watered down that by the time you get anything much more that a pale tint to the icing, you have already added so much liquid that the icing is too runny to use.  To fix that, you add more icing sugar, which makes the color paler, so you add coloring, which thins out the icing and so on. You are caught in an endless cycle of doom while your cake sits on the counter, drying out.

There is a simple way out of this, though.  Instead of using liquid food coloring, you can buy concentrated pastes made specifically for coloring icings and frostings.  These colors are so concentrated that even a small amount will give bright vivid colors.  You can buy them at specialty stores that carry cake patterns and pans, some natural food stores, and the odd supermarket.  The ones I use are made by Wilton.  I get them at Nutter's in Saskatoon.  You can also buy them online from Amazon.

Because they are so concentrated, it is easy to get the colors you want.  For lighter shades, you need to be careful not to add too much.  What I usually do is dip a toothpick into the paste and then swirl it around in the mixed icing to transfer the color, and then blend it in.  I go back and forth like this a few times, using a clean toothpick each time so as not to contaminate the paste, until I get the color I want.  For a really bright color, or a deep dark tone, you might try using the tip of a spoon to transfer more color at once but it doesn't take much.

Using concentrated icing paste should solve your problem.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

Rancid Flour

Hi
I substituted white whole wheat flour in a Challah recipe that says to use just whole wheat flour.   I found that it tasted and smelled like play dough.  Is there a difference in white whole wheat flour and whole wheat flour. If so what is the difference?  Do you have any good idea for a whole grain healthy Challah?

--Julie

By coincidence, just as I was reading your email I happened to take a taste of a restaurant whole wheat dinner roll that had a similar chemical taste.  Play dough is a good description.

White whole wheat flour is similar to whole wheat flour that has been milled finer so that it doesn't have the larger and tougher particles you find in regular whole wheat.  Some manufacturers claim that it tastes just like white flour.  While the flavor is much lighter than whole wheat, there is still a perceptible nutty taste.  You can make your own approximation of white whole wheat flour by mixing regular white flour with an equal amount of whole wheat flour that has been sifted using a fine mesh kitchen strainer.

My initial guess is that either the flour or oil you used had gone rancid.  If it was the oil, you would likely have noticed the taste in other dishes, so I'll bet it was the flour.  Because white whole wheat flour is made from the whole wheat berry, it contains considerably more fat than does regular flour.  According to King Arthur Flour's website, their 100% White Whole Wheat Flour for professional bakers contains 1.62 grams of fat per 100 grams of flour.  Compared to the USDA analysis for all-purpose white flour, which they give as 0.98 grams per 100, the white whole wheat flour contains 65% more fat.

Because of the extra fat, the shelf life of white whole wheat flour is shorter.  Robin Hood Flours in Canada gives the shelf life of their regular, all-purpose flour at 12 months, but their white whole wheat flour at only 9 months.  Also, white whole wheat flour is a bit of an odd mix, targeting a niche market looking for increased fiber in baked goods traditionally made with white flour.  Because of this, it may sit longer on store shelves than other products.

To tell if it is rancid, take a pinch of flour and place it on your tongue.  Regular flour will have a little taste.  Most of us know the taste of raw flour from undercooked sauces or raw dough.  White whole wheat flour will also have a slight nutty flavor, similar to whole wheat flour or wheat bran, only less distinct.  Rancid flour, on the other hand, will have a slight tang to it and will sting a little on your tongue.  If you have ever tasted the membrane that separates the two pieces of meat inside a walnut, rancid flour will have that same acrid flavor only not as strong.

I have tasted other baked goods with rancid white flour in them, so when I tasted the dinner roll, I knew immediately what the taste was, which is why I think that was your problem, too.  Try buying another bag of white whole wheat flour.  Taste it first to be sure it isn't rancid and if not try your Challah recipe again.  Also make sure that the oil you are using is new and has no off tastes.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

Ounces Weight vs Fluid Ounces Volume

Isn't it true that an 16 oz of dry goods is different that 16 oz of liquid measure.  If a recipe calls for 8oz of flour, you should measure it using a scale rather than using a cup (which is a liquid measure, no matter what kind of cup you use).  I'm confused.

--SM

The confusion comes from the fact that in English we use the word "ounce" when talking about both the weight of something or the volume  it occupies.  In cooking, if you are talking about the volume of something, technically you should refer to the measure as "fluid ounces" and if  you are weighing something then you can say just "ounces."

Ingredients such as beans, sugar or flour can be conveniently measured by volume in cups, pints, quarts, liters and all of the other units that are used to calculate volume, including fluid ounces.  They can also be weighed in pounds, kilograms and ounces.

Depending on what ingredient you are measuring, the weight in ounces and the volume in fluid ounces may be close to the same or vastly different.  Sixteen fluid ounces of water weigh very close to 16 ounces (1 pound)^*.

Sixteen fluid ounces (2 cups) of flour will weigh around 8 ounces (1/2 pound) if it is sifted, and somewhat more, around 9 ounces, if it is unsifted.  This is just a rough estimate, though.

So, if your recipe calls for "fluid ounces" then you are definitely using a volume measuring device, such as a liquid or dry measure.  See the post Difference Between Dry and Liquid Measuring Cups for guidance on which to use and how.

If the recipe just says "ounces", for some ingredients you may be able to assume that the author means to measure by weight.  For ingredients like flour, though, the author may mean either weight or volume so you need to be careful to understand which is being used.  In books on baking there is frequently a section near the start on techniques where sometimes they may clarify which measure they are using.

As a further note, fluid ounces may be abbreviated in recipes as "fl. oz." and ounces as just "oz."

-----------------

^* The scientist in me wants to say that is true provided that the water is close to room temperature and the ambient air pressure is close to standard pressure at sea level, but for most practical purposes you can consider them to be equivalent.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

Baking Soda and Baking Powder - The Saga Continues

What on earth!   Here is my internet journey, seeking the answer to "Baking soda vs. baking powder."

1. Baking powder can replace baking soda
2. Baking powder cant replace baking soda
3. Baking powder can't replace baking soda and vice versa.

Here are some excerpts:

• "You can substitute baking powder in place of baking soda (you'll need more baking powder and it may affect the taste), but you can't use baking soda when a recipe calls for baking powder." http://chemistry.about.com/cs/foodchemistry/f/blbaking.htm /li>
• "In recipes calling for baking powder, baking soda can be used, along with some cornstarch and cream of tartar. Baking powder cannot, however, be used to replace baking soda." http://kitchensavvy.typepad.com/journal/2005/01/baking_soda_vs_.html
• "While you can't swap baking soda for baking powder, or vice versa ..." http://www.asianonlinerecipes.com/food_articles/baking-soda-baking-powder.php

So which one is it?

If baking is all about accuracy, then why is it that I constantly find conflicting information, all from experts?  How does anything ever get baked and turn out edible, if everyone has so many different opinions?

I am starting to believe that bakers are actually other-worldly beings that are unknowingly just manipulating ingredients with their minds.

--Curtis

OK, before you go reporting a Close Encounter, let's see if we can set this straight.

First, just a touch of chemistry.  Baking soda or bicarbonate of soda (NaHCO₃) is a mild base that has a number of applications in baking.  Among those are to cause chemical leavening by releasing bubbles of carbon dioxide gas when combined with an acid, and changing level of acidity or basicity of a recipe.

The acidity/basicity can be important in a number of ways.  For example, cookies that are slightly basic will spread more and brown more than ones that are slightly acidic.  If you are making a chocolate cake that is too acidic, it will turn the chocolate color from dark brown to light brown to red.  That's part of the secret to a Red velvet cake.

Baking powder is baking soda with an acid added to cause the chemical leavening.  The type of acid varies with different formulations and applications, as can be found in the KitchenSavvy article mentioned above.

As discussed in Let Them Eat Cake, as well as the above KitchenSavvy article, when recipes use both baking soda and baking powder, there is usually another acidic ingredient such as molasses, brown sugar, buttermilk or sour cream that combines with the baking soda to create bubbles.

So, which of the above is it? 

Since baking powder contains baking soda, you can indeed use it to replace baking soda.  The problems is that the leftover acid that is not neutralized in your recipe will affect the flavor and may also affect the result.  A cookie that is supposed to spread during cooking likely won't, and it may not brown properly, or may end up over cooked if you try to brown it enough.  Also, the final color of the product may not be what you expect since the product is acidic.  So, point 1 above is technically correct, as far as it goes, but you may not like the result. 

If you insist on trying, though, you will need up to four times as much baking powder as the amount of baking soda that was called for in the recipe.   Just don't say I told you it was a good idea!

Point 2 is correct, since what you are actually doing when you combine baking soda with cream of tartar is making your own homemade baking powder.  What you are really doing is substituting baking powder that someone mixed up for you with baking powder you made yourself.  The cornstarch is just filler to make up 1/4 more so the total volume works out the same but isn't really necessary.

And point 3 is correct, since you can't just swap them one for one.  As the referenced site goes on to explain, if you don't have baking powder you can make your own homemade stuff by using 1/4 the volume of baking powder specified of baking soda plus 1/2 the volume of cream of tartar.  Since you need to include the cream of tartar, you are really not just substituting one for the other.

The postings referenced in points 2 and 3 pretty much agree in what they say.  The problem with the first reference is it ignores the other aspects of food chemistry that come into play when you start altering the acid/base ratios in recipes.

Hopefully, all of this helps.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

TaDa

Breadmaker Jewish Rye Bread
(click for recipe)

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

A Pizza Find

For years, I have been trying to make a good thin crust pizza.  When my wife and I were in Italy several years ago, we really enjoyed a pizza we had in Rome, near the Trevi Fountain.  The crust was so thin and crisp that it was almost cracker like.

I tried everything I could think of to make a crust like that -- varying the water/flour ratios, making the dough with or without olive oil, rolling the crust thinner, using different oven temperatures, placing my pizza stone on a rack as high as possible in the oven, super-heating the pizza stone for a few minutes using the boiler before putting the pizza into the oven, even changing the order of ingredients on the pizza.  These all made some difference.  None of them gave the crust I was looking for.

Then, this past weekend, I pulled "Brother Juniper's Bread Book" by Peter Reinhart off the bookshelf and turned to his section on pizza.  In the inset on Memorable Pizza there was a suggestion I hadn't even thought of trying -- that the pizza stone should be put on the bottom shelf or even right on the floor of the oven and pre-heated for at least 20 minutes at 500°F (260°C) or higher.

Since I use parchment paper to keep the crust from sticking to my peel (actually an old piece of 1/8 inch plywood) I have to keep the temperature at or below 450°F (232°C), but I could certainly try putting my pizza stone on the floor of my oven.  My oven is electric, but the heating element is under the floor so that isn't a problem.  Other than that, I made a plain lean pizza dough with just water, flour, yeast and salt.  No fat, no sugar and no flavorings.  I rolled a thin crust and assembled the pizza in the traditional North American order of sauce, ingredients and finally the cheese on top, and baked it for 13 minutes.

I knew as soon as I sliced the pizza that this was the missing link.  I could hear the knife crunching through the crust.  The result was the cracker thin, crunchy crust I had been trying for.  Because the stone had been heated directly by the element, the crust cooked quickly, before the other ingredients could make it soggy, as sometimes happens.

I know there is still some room for improvement.  Next time, I need to let the dough relax a bit more as I roll it out, and I think I'll try adding a little oil.  Both of those should help the overall texture, but I'm pleased with the result so far.

So, if you have been trying for that thin crunchy crust too, try lowering your pizza stone.    It may just be the secret you are looking for.

If there is nothing to get in the way, try putting the stone right on the floor of the oven. If you have an electric oven with the element above the floor then you will need to use a rack in the lowest position and put the stone on that.   If you are worried about safety, or the warranty on your oven, you may prefer to use a rack at the lowest position.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward