At 08:58 AM 12/28/2004, Kevin wrote:
>It was going so well. I sterilized the jar and utensils, mixed in one cup
>of warm water (chlorine free) with one cup of whole wheat flour and set
>aside. After 24 hours the flour had settled, leaving dark water at the
>top, but there were some bubbles.
>
>Mixed, poured out one cup and mixed in 1/2 cup whole wheat flour and 1/2
>cup warm water. In 12 hours the mixture had doubled, with bubbles about
>1/8 of an inch across throughout, and was floating atop a layer of water.
>The starter had a sour smell. Mixed, poured out one cup, mixed in 1/2 cup
>whole wheat flour and 1/2 cup warm water, and set aside again.
>
>Then nothing. After 12 hours there were no signs of bubbles. Mixed and
>waited 12 hours more. Nothing. Waited another 24 hours. Nothing.
>
>What happened?

Probably oversoured/undernourished - for sure after the last 24 hours. I am
not sure if you mean by "mixed" after 12 hours that you fed it again. It's
not clear how you fed it after the second step -

1 - 24 hours: reduce and double
2 - 12 hours: activity, reduce and double again
3 - 12 hours: no more activity - not clear if you fed again
4 - 24 hours: no more activity - not clear if you fed again

What's somewhat strange is the separation/floating you describe after step 2.

If you have sour smell and nothing or little putrid/disgusting/strange
smell, you are in business and need to keep nursing. In your case, that
would have been after 36 hours.

Somewhat correlating with:

http://samartha.net/SD/MakeStarter01-5.html

The tricky part is to recognize oversouring and take countermeasures i. e.
stronger dilution. If it's happening and you don't keep going, it gets quiet.

It could be that the LB's are not doing much gassing, but are active and
kill everything else off and then shut down themselves.

It's often not clear if it's undernourishment or oversouring and the way
out of it is to go both ways - split it, use one part with strong dilution
- 1 : 10, the other part go on as before.

Also, stirring helps moving the nutrients around, get some air in (the
critters like it) and get a control on gas production.

It could well be that your quiet mixture comes up again, when you do a
strong dilution and continue feeding.

Growth rates are geometric in the area of doubling maybe every 1 1/2 - 2
1/2 hours, so going at full blast, you can have like a 64-fold increase in
12 hours and a 4096-fold increase in 24 hours if no hindering factors
(souring, nutrient depletion) come into play which happen

Maybe it gives you some ideas what could be going on.

In any way - congratulations to trying this. Can be a rewarding experience.

As for the other responses:

Kenneth: flour sterilized? - Hardly because it was active and smelled sour.
Mac: suspected virus - Nice idea. Souring by LB's is pretty
established in our biosphere. Maybe DA can tell you more about this. He
claimed to be unable to keep a starter going for a longer time and need to
get regular updates - all to be taken with grains of salt from that corner.

Samartha


>_______________________________________________
>Rec.food.sourdough mailing list

remove "-nospam" when replying, and it's in my email address

In message =
news:mailman.1104293127.28154.rec.food.sourdough@w ww.mountainbitwarrior.c=
om
Samartha claimed that I=20
> claimed to be unable to keep a starter going for a longer time and=20
> need to get regular updates - all to be taken with grains of salt=20
> from that corner

What in blazes is Samartha talking about? -- could such a=20
claim as that be Googled?

Occasionally someone or other claims that starting with a known=20
culture makes good sense.

But if everybody did that, there would be none of these hopeless
threads and perpetual commiseration. So what then for the chatters
to chat about?

--=20
Dick Adams
<firstname> dot <lastname> at bigfoot dot com
___________________
Sourdough FAQ guide at=20
http://www.nyx.net/~dgreenw/sourdoughfaqs.html

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 21:04:06 -0700, Samartha
> wrote:

>Kenneth: flour sterilized? - Hardly because it was active and smelled sour.

Hi Samartha,

Perhaps you are right, but IIRC it was active only at the
very start. That pointed me in the direction of
contamination rather than the growth of critters in the
flour.

All the best,

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

Kenneth wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 21:04:06 -0700, Samartha
> > wrote:
>
> >Kenneth: flour sterilized? - Hardly because it was active and
smelled sour.
>
> Hi Samartha,
>
> Perhaps you are right, but IIRC it was active only at the
> very start. That pointed me in the direction of
> contamination rather than the growth of critters in the
> flour.
>
> All the best,
>
> --
> Kenneth
>
> If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

If the culture environment is dryer, as in dough-like, you can avoid
most, if not all, of the opportunistic growth from undesireable
bacteria. The appropriate microbial culture comes with fresh grain. It
is the basis of a symbiotic ecology which makes makes sprouting
efficient. Your gut carries bacterial for the same purpose: to make
energy conversion efficient. Too much water is not a natural state for
sourdough culture(s). Samartha has mentioned on several occassions that
stirring to oxygenate is important. Why might this be? Too much water?
All of the comments about hooch indicate bad culture practices, wastes
are inbalancing the culture process. There is nothing in the
grain-to-mature-plant cycle that works under water. Grain rots in a
flooded field.

So does flour under water.

Will

On 29 Dec 2004 08:23:51 -0800, "Will"
> wrote:

>Kenneth wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 21:04:06 -0700, Samartha
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Kenneth: flour sterilized? - Hardly because it was active and
>smelled sour.
>>
>> Hi Samartha,
>>
>> Perhaps you are right, but IIRC it was active only at the
>> very start. That pointed me in the direction of
>> contamination rather than the growth of critters in the
>> flour.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> --
>> Kenneth
>>
>> If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
>
>If the culture environment is dryer, as in dough-like, you can avoid
>most, if not all, of the opportunistic growth from undesireable
>bacteria. The appropriate microbial culture comes with fresh grain. It
>is the basis of a symbiotic ecology which makes makes sprouting
>efficient. Your gut carries bacterial for the same purpose: to make
>energy conversion efficient. Too much water is not a natural state for
>sourdough culture(s). Samartha has mentioned on several occassions that
>stirring to oxygenate is important. Why might this be? Too much water?
>All of the comments about hooch indicate bad culture practices, wastes
>are inbalancing the culture process. There is nothing in the
>grain-to-mature-plant cycle that works under water. Grain rots in a
>flooded field.
>
>So does flour under water.
>
>Will

Hi Will,

I don't dispute your suggestion, but the logic seems a bit
tortured...

First, though the yeasts do, indeed, come "with fresh grain"
it is my understanding that the lactobacilli do not. It is
my understanding that they seem to come from the baker.

Also, when you say of the "culture" that "It is the basis of
a symbiotic ecology which makes sprouting efficient." I
don't get the connection between sprouting, and generating a
sourdough culture (even leaving aside the issue of the
absence of LB on the grain.)

Similarly when you say "There is nothing in the
grain-to-mature-plant cycle that works under water." That
would certainly seem to be true, but how might that fact be
connected to the growth of a viable culture for baking?

It seems rather like suggesting that we cannot make rubber
from latex because there is nothing in the cycle of the life
of the Hevea tree that involves the shedding of the sap...

And finally, in response to Samartha's suggesting stirring,
you ask "Why might this be? Too much water?" but, again, I
don't get the connection. Why would stirring be related to
the amount of water?

I certainly agree with your comment that "the comments about
hooch indicate bad culture practices" but don't see any
(direct) connection to the issue of the amount of water in
the starter.

All the best,

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

Kenneth wrote:
> On 29 Dec 2004 08:23:51 -0800, "Will"
> > wrote:
>
> >Kenneth wrote:
> >> On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 21:04:06 -0700, Samartha
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >Kenneth: flour sterilized? - Hardly because it was active and
> >smelled sour.
> >>
> >> Hi Samartha,
> >>
> >> Perhaps you are right, but IIRC it was active only at the
> >> very start. That pointed me in the direction of
> >> contamination rather than the growth of critters in the
> >> flour.
> >>
> >> All the best,
> >>
> >> --
> >> Kenneth
> >>
> >> If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
> >
> >If the culture environment is dryer, as in dough-like, you can avoid
> >most, if not all, of the opportunistic growth from undesireable
> >bacteria. The appropriate microbial culture comes with fresh grain.
It
> >is the basis of a symbiotic ecology which makes makes sprouting
> >efficient. Your gut carries bacterial for the same purpose: to make
> >energy conversion efficient. Too much water is not a natural state
for
> >sourdough culture(s). Samartha has mentioned on several occassions
that
> >stirring to oxygenate is important. Why might this be? Too much
water?
> >All of the comments about hooch indicate bad culture practices,
wastes
> >are inbalancing the culture process. There is nothing in the
> >grain-to-mature-plant cycle that works under water. Grain rots in a
> >flooded field.
> >
> >So does flour under water.
> >
> >Will
>
> Hi Will,
>
> I don't dispute your suggestion, but the logic seems a bit
> tortured...

Ok, I'll try a Houdini-like escape via in-line responses...
>
> First, though the yeasts do, indeed, come "with fresh grain"
> it is my understanding that the lactobacilli do not. It is
> my understanding that they seem to come from the baker.
>
------
Not according to the paper Roy Basin linked in this forum about 5
months ago. Those scientists tested several geographically dispersed
grain supplies and spectographically typed "both sides" of a number of
SD cultures.
------

> Also, when you say of the "culture" that "It is the basis of
> a symbiotic ecology which makes sprouting efficient." I
> don't get the connection between sprouting, and generating a
> sourdough culture (even leaving aside the issue of the
> absence of LB on the grain.)

-----
Consider the well known use of malted barley. It is added to all
quality bread flours. The grain is partially sprouted to promote the
presence of an important sugar complex and diastace, an enzyme that
increases fermentation efficiency. There is a lot of documented science
in this area.
------

>
> Similarly when you say "There is nothing in the
> grain-to-mature-plant cycle that works under water." That
> would certainly seem to be true, but how might that fact be
> connected to the growth of a viable culture for baking?

-----
The growth question you pose is key. The SD culture we want to grow
does not feed on water AND it needs enzymes provided by the grain, on
the grain, to work. Diluting and dispersing isn't logical.
-----

>
> It seems rather like suggesting that we cannot make rubber
> from latex because there is nothing in the cycle of the life
> of the Hevea tree that involves the shedding of the sap...

----
I have to admit I like your analogy. Would you add water to the latex
too?.
----

>
> And finally, in response to Samartha's suggesting stirring,
> you ask "Why might this be? Too much water?" but, again, I
> don't get the connection. Why would stirring be related to
> the amount of water?

----
If the key components are diluted and spatially separated from one
another and if oxygen is a player which it is in the Krebs cycle... one
might stir periodically to combine them.
----

>
> I certainly agree with your comment that "the comments about
> hooch indicate bad culture practices" but don't see any
> (direct) connection to the issue of the amount of water in
> the starter.
>

----
What is hooch but too much water and trapped respiration waste after
everything settles?
Without the water layer, the starter would outgas cleanly.

My argument isn't that water is bad. My argument is that too much water
is fundamentally inefficient. When I start a culture with a moistened
ball of dough, I do not have to worry about competing "bad" organisms
fooling me for a couple of days. And I don't deal with hooch or watch
the bubbles moving through it.

The smell of a ripened piece of dough has very little in common with
the smell of submerged starter.
That should tell us something.
-----

Will

On 29 Dec 2004 08:23:51 -0800, "Will"
> wrote:

>Kenneth wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 21:04:06 -0700, Samartha
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Kenneth: flour sterilized? - Hardly because it was active and
>smelled sour.
>>
>> Hi Samartha,
>>
>> Perhaps you are right, but IIRC it was active only at the
>> very start. That pointed me in the direction of
>> contamination rather than the growth of critters in the
>> flour.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> --
>> Kenneth
>>
>> If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
>
>If the culture environment is dryer, as in dough-like, you can avoid
>most, if not all, of the opportunistic growth from undesireable
>bacteria. The appropriate microbial culture comes with fresh grain. It
>is the basis of a symbiotic ecology which makes makes sprouting
>efficient. Your gut carries bacterial for the same purpose: to make
>energy conversion efficient. Too much water is not a natural state for
>sourdough culture(s). Samartha has mentioned on several occassions that
>stirring to oxygenate is important. Why might this be? Too much water?
>All of the comments about hooch indicate bad culture practices, wastes
>are inbalancing the culture process. There is nothing in the
>grain-to-mature-plant cycle that works under water. Grain rots in a
>flooded field.
>
>So does flour under water.
>
>Will

Hi Will,

Thanks for your very interesting response(s)...

All the best,

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

At 09:23 AM 12/29/2004, Will wrote:
>If the culture environment is dryer, as in dough-like, you can avoid
>most, if not all, of the opportunistic growth from undesireable
>bacteria.

Absolutely untrue IMO - yeasts and LB's need moisture and if it's just
moisture, many other organisms can grow in moist flour - anaerobic, molds,
fungi, bacteria, bacilli - you have it.

I have a research article where the interaction of sourdough specific
organisms with flour specific organisms is being looked into. It's from
1988 and may not be fully up to date any more but for sure holds still some
water. They looked at 13 flour specific critters and 10 LB's. Best in
retarding growth of bacteria and bacilli was LB leichmannii and LB SF was
second worst - apparently doesn't need it any more when making home in
sourdoughs.

Interesting, the organism from that bunch which is most tolerant against
lactic and acetic acid is a streptococcus faecalis. You can guess by the
name where it is coming from. Not really plant specific I would say but
it's regular home may not be abundant with water either - most of the time.

Escherichia coli is in that collection as well.

(googled: Escherichia coli O157:H7 is an emerging cause of foodborne
illness. An estimated 73,000 cases of infection and 61 deaths occur in the
United States each year.... E. coli O157:H7 is one of hundreds of strains
of the bacterium Escherichia coli. Although most strains are harmless and
live in the intestines of healthy humans and animals, this strain produces
a powerful toxin and can cause severe illness.) I think that feedlot cows
can have it and sourdough kills it if it's in the flour.

The main factor of inhibition they figured in that research project is the
acidity and mature sourdough does not get affected by the new critters in
the flour because of it.

>The appropriate microbial culture comes with fresh grain.

Doesn't necessarily need to be fresh - the organisms seem to hang around.

>It
>is the basis of a symbiotic ecology which makes makes sprouting
>efficient. Your gut carries bacterial for the same purpose: to make
>energy conversion efficient. Too much water is not a natural state for
>sourdough culture(s).

Says who? What would be a "natural state" of sourdough? Is there sourdough
occurring in nature without human interference? Maybe in a dove crop - who
knows? Doesn't really matter here.

And what's "too much water"? Continuous SD starter productions or
industrial SD dough production is run with high hydrations so it can be
pumped. This would not work if the LB's and their mates were water shy.
They work anaerobic and don't care how wet it is as long as there is food
around and the temperature is right AFAIKS.

> Samartha has mentioned on several occassions that
>stirring to oxygenate is important.

Maybe under some circumstances but surely not necessary. They get an extra
kick but can do very well without it. Unless you are pursuing a particular
goal, I would not call it "important" - helpful under circumstances, maybe.

>Why might this be? Too much water?
>All of the comments about hooch indicate bad culture practices, wastes
>are inbalancing the culture process.

Who makes a problem about hooch - it happens, so what. What's bad about it?
In earlier days it was valued in situations.

I see hooch as a protection layer. If the culture dries out, molds grow,
hooch prevents this. That's definitely an issue with drier cultures stores
over longer periods in a fridge. I'd say wetter is better.

And who knows what taste effects a bread can get when it's made with a
starter sitting in the fridge for two month under 1/2" of hooch.

I think you are really depriving you of great adventures if you exclude
hooch from your sourdough live.

> There is nothing in the
>grain-to-mature-plant cycle that works under water. Grain rots in a
>flooded field.

Doesn't this make you wonder why it doesn't rot, i. e. smell rotten in your
moist starter? And rice isn't a grain because it grows in water - right?


>So does flour under water.

I think that it would get eaten when dropped into the water - fish or
smaller living things may really enjoy it.

Happy bubbles!

Samartha


_______________________________
>Rec.food.sourdough mailing list

remove "-nospam" when replying, and it's in my email address

In article
ountainbitwarrior.com>,
says...
> Probably oversoured/undernourished - for sure after the last 24 hours. I am
> not sure if you mean by "mixed" after 12 hours that you fed it again. It's
> not clear how you fed it after the second step -
>
> 1 - 24 hours: reduce and double
> 2 - 12 hours: activity, reduce and double again
> 3 - 12 hours: no more activity - not clear if you fed again
> 4 - 24 hours: no more activity - not clear if you fed again

No, I didn't feed it when I mixed it (stirred it) after 12 hours. I fed
it every 24 hours until it stopped reacting. At that point I backed away
to see what would happen.

> What's somewhat strange is the separation/floating you describe after step 2.

I wonder if I had too much water for the flour. This morning I noticed
a separation of foamed flour atop a layer of water, which was atop the
main flour mix.

> If you have sour smell and nothing or little putrid/disgusting/strange
> smell, you are in business and need to keep nursing. In your case, that
> would have been after 36 hours.
>
> Somewhat correlating with:
>
> http://samartha.net/SD/MakeStarter01-5.html
>
> The tricky part is to recognize oversouring and take countermeasures i. e.
> stronger dilution. If it's happening and you don't keep going, it gets quiet.
>
> It could be that the LB's are not doing much gassing, but are active and
> kill everything else off and then shut down themselves.

It's going to be a bit difficult for me to know what good starter smells
like. The only one I have is a non-standard starter from a friend that's
feed with sugar and potato flakes. That starter has a smell not unlike
beer with a hint of vinegar. The one I'm trying to capture is soured and
earlier Wednesday it had overtones of a sweet smell. It reminds me of
fresh sugar cane juice. By Wednesday evening it had a slight yeasty smell
and a steady stream of tiny bubbles rising to the surface.

OTOH, my first starter attempt, which was from a dough ball of unbleached
flour, had the aroma of cheese. That one developed mold and was promptly
discarded. I tried this method assuming it would be harder for mold to
gain a foothold.

Here's something interesting: I stirred it while allowing the flour to
warm to room temperature and by feeding time all action had stopped. This
makes me suspect that something on the sides of the jar is inhibiting the
yeast. The yeasty smell was all but gone and only a souring smell
remained. Based on this suspicion I've changed containers. Now I'm using
three non-dairy topping bowls covered with paper towels.

> It's often not clear if it's undernourishment or oversouring and the way
> out of it is to go both ways - split it, use one part with strong dilution
> - 1 : 10, the other part go on as before.

Makes sense. I wondered whether to wait for a stronger starter and then
add a small amount to clean flour. If I understand you correctly, then by
over souring the bacteria that produces lactic acid might have gotten the
upper hand and is inhibiting the yeast. Is that correct? Therefore by
splitting it and diluting the starer, I'm giving the wild yeast a
chance to multiply in a low lactic acid environment.

Based on your suggestion, I've divided the starter into three batches.
The first is a continuation of the original, using whole wheat flour. The
second is five teaspoons of the original mix to one cup of standard all-
purpose flour. The third is 1/2 cup original to 1/2 cup standard all-
purpose flour (I was tired and miscalculated: I intended to use 1 cup of
the original less the five teaspoons). I also added only enough water to
make a thin dough and not just blindly dump in half a cup, on the chance
I've been using too much water. And we shall see what we shall see.

> Also, stirring helps moving the nutrients around, get some air in (the
> critters like it) and get a control on gas production.

Nods. That's why I was stirring it.

> It could well be that your quiet mixture comes up again, when you do a
> strong dilution and continue feeding.
>
> Growth rates are geometric in the area of doubling maybe every 1 1/2 - 2
> 1/2 hours, so going at full blast, you can have like a 64-fold increase in
> 12 hours and a 4096-fold increase in 24 hours if no hindering factors
> (souring, nutrient depletion) come into play which happen
>
> Maybe it gives you some ideas what could be going on.
>
> In any way - congratulations to trying this. Can be a rewarding experience.

Many thanks to everyone for the help.

- Kevin Cheek

At 08:46 PM 12/29/2004, Kevin wrote:


>It's going to be a bit difficult for me to know what good starter smells
>like. The only one I have is a non-standard starter from a friend that's
>feed with sugar and potato flakes. That starter has a smell not unlike
>beer with a hint of vinegar. The one I'm trying to capture is soured and
>earlier Wednesday it had overtones of a sweet smell. It reminds me of
>fresh sugar cane juice. By Wednesday evening it had a slight yeasty smell
>and a steady stream of tiny bubbles rising to the surface.

You may be fermenting something else - some kind of alcoholic
beverage. Bubbles rising to the surface?

You know, this volume measuring business is kind of vague.

I measure a cup of flour with 137 g and the cup with water 227 g which
gives a hydration of 166 % - that's high. If you go 1/2 cup water with 1
cup flour, you would have 83 % hydration with my measurements, that's better.

With the smell - you'll know when it's right. If you do full grain
starters, the smell sensations can be very entertaining.


>OTOH, my first starter attempt, which was from a dough ball of unbleached
>flour, had the aroma of cheese. That one developed mold and was promptly
>discarded. I tried this method assuming it would be harder for mold to
>gain a foothold.

That cheesy smell, that's overrun starter. I got this with white starters.
When a starter dies - the organisms die and molds can catch hold; it also
starts smelling rotten.


>Here's something interesting: I stirred it while allowing the flour to
>warm to room temperature and by feeding time all action had stopped. This
>makes me suspect that something on the sides of the jar is inhibiting the
>yeast. The yeasty smell was all but gone and only a souring smell
>remained. Based on this suspicion I've changed containers. Now I'm using
>three non-dairy topping bowls covered with paper towels.

Initially, you have all kinds of crappy organisms growing, there is really
no need to be anal about being very clean.

Covering so flies don't get is is probably a good idea. The small
fruitflies would go into my starters - they seem to like the smell.


> > It's often not clear if it's undernourishment or oversouring and the way
> > out of it is to go both ways - split it, use one part with strong dilution
> > - 1 : 10, the other part go on as before.


>Makes sense. I wondered whether to wait for a stronger starter and then
>add a small amount to clean flour. If I understand you correctly, then by
>over souring the bacteria that produces lactic acid might have gotten the
>upper hand and is inhibiting the yeast. Is that correct? Therefore by
>splitting it and diluting the starer, I'm giving the wild yeast a
>chance to multiply in a low lactic acid environment.

Well, the LB's stop when it get's too sour - the yeasts probably too.
Everything stops if it gets too sour and eventually dies.

Symptom: No activity.

The other situation is low germ count, nothing or very little growing.

Symptom: No activity.

If you look at it, you don't know which situation you are in. The way out
of it is to cover both.

With the oversouring, the new addition in feeding needs to offset the
sourness to bring it into a range where the organisms can grow again. Often
doubling the flour is not enough. Tripling works most of the time. With
established starters, and you kind of knowing what they are doing. When
starting one and you don't know where you are, a stronger dilution can be
helpful.


>Based on your suggestion, I've divided the starter into three batches.
>The first is a continuation of the original, using whole wheat flour. The
>second is five teaspoons of the original mix to one cup of standard all-
>purpose flour. The third is 1/2 cup original to 1/2 cup standard all-
>purpose flour (I was tired and miscalculated: I intended to use 1 cup of
>the original less the five teaspoons). I also added only enough water to
>make a thin dough and not just blindly dump in half a cup, on the chance
>I've been using too much water. And we shall see what we shall see.

Sounds like a plan! Although your bubble water is a mystery.

Also, you are using 1 cup feedings - that's over 100 g and you'll get a lot
of material that way.

I am sure you'll work it out.

Enjoy!

Samartha

>_______________________________________________
>Rec.food.sourdough mailing list

remove "-nospam" when replying, and it's in my email address

In article
ountainbitwarrior.com>,
says...
> With the oversouring, the new addition in feeding needs to offset the
> sourness to bring it into a range where the organisms can grow again. Often
> doubling the flour is not enough. Tripling works most of the time. With
> established starters, and you kind of knowing what they are doing. When
> starting one and you don't know where you are, a stronger dilution can be
> helpful.

By Thursday morning the whole wheat mix was frothy and was floating atop
liquid. The diluted and half whole wheat/half standard flour mixtures
showed little if any activity. I wondered if some other microscopic
critter in the whole wheat was throwing the mixture off. I discarded the
half and half mixture, added just standard flour to the whole wheat mix,
and fed the diluted mixture with standard flour.

Twelve hours later, small bubbles covered both mixtures. This time the
original whole wheat mix had not separated. Both had a yeasty odor. The
diluted starter smelled most of yeast and had a cleaner, sweeter smell
than the original starter. So I discarded the original and continued with
the diluted.

I now wish I had set aside a bowl made only with standard flour to use as
as a control specimen. Right now I don't know if the diluted mixture is
reacting to the inoculation from the original starter, or if the yeast
action is strictly from the standard flour.

Anyway, about four hours after the last feeding the remaining starter has
patches of small bubbles atop the mixture and yeasty sourish dusty smell.
And I started to notice an unusual reaction, not with the starter but
myself: Itching. At first I wasn't sure, but by evening it was more
pronounced. Something in the goop made me itch whenever I smelled it. I
don't have that reaction to yeast or the non-standard starter, so it must
have been something else. The starter ended up in a ziplock bag in the
trash can.

Guess I'll have to make do with the non-standard starter I got from a
friend. Until I try it again, that is.

- Kevin Cheek

In article
ountainbitwarrior.com>,
says...
> With the oversouring, the new addition in feeding needs to offset the
> sourness to bring it into a range where the organisms can grow again. Often
> doubling the flour is not enough. Tripling works most of the time. With
> established starters, and you kind of knowing what they are doing. When
> starting one and you don't know where you are, a stronger dilution can be
> helpful.

By Thursday morning the whole wheat mix was frothy and was floating atop
liquid. The diluted and half whole wheat/half standard flour mixtures
showed little if any activity. I wondered if some other microscopic
critter in the whole wheat was throwing the mixture off. I discarded the
half and half mixture, added just standard flour to the whole wheat mix,
and fed the diluted mixture with standard flour.

Twelve hours later, small bubbles covered both mixtures. This time the
original whole wheat mix had not separated. Both had a yeasty odor. The
diluted starter smelled most of yeast and had a cleaner, sweeter smell
than the original starter. So I discarded the original and continued with
the diluted.

I now wish I had set aside a bowl made only with standard flour to use as
as a control specimen. Right now I don't know if the diluted mixture is
reacting to the inoculation from the original starter, or if the yeast
action is strictly from the standard flour.

Anyway, about four hours after the last feeding the remaining starter has
patches of small bubbles atop the mixture and yeasty sourish dusty smell.
And I started to notice an unusual reaction, not with the starter but
myself: Itching. At first I wasn't sure, but by evening it was more
pronounced. Something in the goop made me itch whenever I smelled it. I
don't have that reaction to yeast or the non-standard starter, so it must
have been something else. The starter ended up in a ziplock bag in the
trash can.

Guess I'll have to make do with the non-standard starter I got from a
friend. Until I try it again, that is.

- Kevin Cheek