Why is it that the Carl starter tastes so funny. I followed all the
instructions to the letter and made the billow loaves on this site.
Well nobody likes them. They are o.k. for normal bread but do NOT taste
like the sourdough I grew up with (I know a little about sourdough as I
grew up in San Francisco!).

I think that the possibility here is that this starter may contain
commercial yeast rather than wild yeast cultures so it will NEVER taste
like sourdough. I've looked at older posts here and it seems to be
common that this culture is infoererior to most others in terms of
taste, but is a good riser. Which also makes me think that yes this
culture does contain *some* commercial yeast.

Help!! I need you ppl!

Oh I should also say that my rising times were about 4 hrs at 80 deg,
then punch down then 4 more hours, baked on a stone at 475 for 45 mins.

Oh I should also say that my rising times were about 4 hrs at 80 deg,
then punch down then 4 more hours, baked on a stone at 475 for 45 mins.

doughwizard wrote:
> Why is it that the Carl starter tastes so funny. I followed all the
> instructions to the letter and made the billow loaves on this site.
> Well nobody likes them. They are o.k. for normal bread but do NOT taste
> like the sourdough I grew up with (I know a little about sourdough as I
> grew up in San Francisco!).
>
> I think that the possibility here is that this starter may contain
> commercial yeast rather than wild yeast cultures so it will NEVER taste
> like sourdough. I've looked at older posts here and it seems to be
> common that this culture is infoererior to most others in terms of
> taste, but is a good riser. Which also makes me think that yes this
> culture does contain *some* commercial yeast.
>
> Help!! I need you ppl!
>
I doubt very much that Carl's friends are putting commercial yeast in
the starter they are sending out. Perhaps you prefer the taste of other
starters. I have eaten sourdough in S.F. and it is nothing like the
stuff that I fondly remember from the '50s in San Francisco. I suspect
that both it and I have changed. I think that there are many
sourdough tastes that people feel are "authentic". Depending on how
you make and rise your bread you can get many different tastes.
Ellen

doughwizard wrote:
> Why is it that the Carl starter tastes so funny. I followed all the
> instructions to the letter and made the billow loaves on this site.
> Well nobody likes them. They are o.k. for normal bread but do NOT taste
> like the sourdough I grew up with (I know a little about sourdough as I
> grew up in San Francisco!).
>
> I think that the possibility here is that this starter may contain
> commercial yeast rather than wild yeast cultures so it will NEVER taste
> like sourdough. I've looked at older posts here and it seems to be
> common that this culture is infoererior to most others in terms of
> taste, but is a good riser. Which also makes me think that yes this
> culture does contain *some* commercial yeast.
>
> Help!! I need you ppl!
>
I doubt very much that Carl's friends are putting commercial yeast in
the starter they are sending out. Perhaps you prefer the taste of other
starters. I have eaten sourdough in S.F. and it is nothing like the
stuff that I fondly remember from the '50s in San Francisco. I suspect
that both it and I have changed. I think that there are many
sourdough tastes that people feel are "authentic". Depending on how
you make and rise your bread you can get many different tastes.
Ellen

doughwizard wrote:
> Oh I should also say that my rising times were about 4 hrs at 80 deg,
> then punch down then 4 more hours, baked on a stone at 475 for 45 mins.
>
Sounds a lot like a method for commercial yeast risen bread. Try a
little longer, cooler rise.
Ellen

doughwizard wrote:
> Oh I should also say that my rising times were about 4 hrs at 80 deg,
> then punch down then 4 more hours, baked on a stone at 475 for 45 mins.
>
Sounds a lot like a method for commercial yeast risen bread. Try a
little longer, cooler rise.
Ellen

doughwizard wrote:
> Oh I should also say that my rising times were about 4 hrs at 80 deg,
> then punch down then 4 more hours, baked on a stone at 475 for 45 mins.
>
Sounds a lot like a method for commercial yeast risen bread. Try a
little longer, cooler rise.
Ellen

doughwizard wrote ..
> Why is it that the Carl starter tastes so funny. I followed all the
> instructions to the letter and made the billow loaves on this site.
> Well nobody likes them. They are o.k. for normal bread but do NOT taste
> like the sourdough I grew up with (I know a little about sourdough as I
> grew up in San Francisco!).
>
> I think that the possibility here is that this starter may contain
> commercial yeast rather than wild yeast cultures so it will NEVER taste
> like sourdough. I've looked at older posts here and it seems to be
> common that this culture is infoererior to most others in terms of
> taste, but is a good riser. Which also makes me think that yes this
> culture does contain *some* commercial yeast.
>
> Help!! I need you ppl!

Then you should try not to be offensive and ignorant, both at once. The Friends of Carl take their work very seriously, and they do not, and would not, put bakers yeast in it.

Even if there was any reason to do so.

A number of microbioligists have tested starters and found that bakers yeast will not survive more than two refreshments in a starter. The acidity is high enough that bakers yeast can not survive.

As to "good" or "bad" taste, Carl's is on the mild side of the spectrum. I have gotten very sour loaves from it from time to time. My feeling is that what a starter is fed is probably the most important determinant of taste. Low ash flours tend to yield sourdough breads that are milder. More ash content causes more sour taste to emerge. Longer rises also lead to stronger tastes.

Mike

doughwizard wrote ..
> Why is it that the Carl starter tastes so funny. I followed all the
> instructions to the letter and made the billow loaves on this site.
> Well nobody likes them. They are o.k. for normal bread but do NOT taste
> like the sourdough I grew up with (I know a little about sourdough as I
> grew up in San Francisco!).
>
> I think that the possibility here is that this starter may contain
> commercial yeast rather than wild yeast cultures so it will NEVER taste
> like sourdough. I've looked at older posts here and it seems to be
> common that this culture is infoererior to most others in terms of
> taste, but is a good riser. Which also makes me think that yes this
> culture does contain *some* commercial yeast.
>
> Help!! I need you ppl!

Then you should try not to be offensive and ignorant, both at once. The Friends of Carl take their work very seriously, and they do not, and would not, put bakers yeast in it.

Even if there was any reason to do so.

A number of microbioligists have tested starters and found that bakers yeast will not survive more than two refreshments in a starter. The acidity is high enough that bakers yeast can not survive.

As to "good" or "bad" taste, Carl's is on the mild side of the spectrum. I have gotten very sour loaves from it from time to time. My feeling is that what a starter is fed is probably the most important determinant of taste. Low ash flours tend to yield sourdough breads that are milder. More ash content causes more sour taste to emerge. Longer rises also lead to stronger tastes.

Mike

"Mike Avery" > wrote in message =
news:mailman.18.1112242677.218.rec.food.sourdough@ mail.otherwhen.com...

> As to "good" or "bad" taste, Carl's is on the mild side of the =
spectrum. =20

So that would be a mild "good" taste, or a mild "bad" taste?

> I have gotten very sour loaves from it from time to time.

No knowing where dumb luck will strike next! =20

> My feeling is that what a starter is fed is probably the most=20
> important determinant of taste.

Other than flour, what are the choices? =20

> More ash content causes more sour taste to emerge.

At what point should the ashes be added? =20

> Longer rises also lead to stronger tastes.

What if it just lies there and does not rise?

--
doughdummy

"Mike Avery" > wrote in message =
news:mailman.18.1112242677.218.rec.food.sourdough@ mail.otherwhen.com...

> As to "good" or "bad" taste, Carl's is on the mild side of the =
spectrum. =20

So that would be a mild "good" taste, or a mild "bad" taste?

> I have gotten very sour loaves from it from time to time.

No knowing where dumb luck will strike next! =20

> My feeling is that what a starter is fed is probably the most=20
> important determinant of taste.

Other than flour, what are the choices? =20

> More ash content causes more sour taste to emerge.

At what point should the ashes be added? =20

> Longer rises also lead to stronger tastes.

What if it just lies there and does not rise?

--
doughdummy

FWIW-I like the starter yeast from King Arthur, it's the French sourdough,
one begins with one quarter teaspoon, and refreshes from there. It's
something like 6.95 plus free shipping. (They stuff an envelope.)
It has been going now in the fridge for over a year, and it's the only bread
I can get which no matter what tastes good enough to eat.
I have two, by the way, from this starter, one is white unbleached, one is
whole wheat.
I made a starter with rye, (I forget from where, ) and while I get really
fast results, (the stuff just explodes~) the dough flattens out no matter
what I do.
The other starter does as well, but it tastes pretty good, no matter what.
My tastes, I guess. It's the one I am going to use to try some of Nancy
Silverton's recipes.

I could never get ANYWHERE with Carl's, at all. Not that it didn't taste ok,
but it was flat, and thicker than a doorstop. I am quite sure I was doing
something wrong, but it was so fussy, I just gave up on it.
gw

FWIW-I like the starter yeast from King Arthur, it's the French sourdough,
one begins with one quarter teaspoon, and refreshes from there. It's
something like 6.95 plus free shipping. (They stuff an envelope.)
It has been going now in the fridge for over a year, and it's the only bread
I can get which no matter what tastes good enough to eat.
I have two, by the way, from this starter, one is white unbleached, one is
whole wheat.
I made a starter with rye, (I forget from where, ) and while I get really
fast results, (the stuff just explodes~) the dough flattens out no matter
what I do.
The other starter does as well, but it tastes pretty good, no matter what.
My tastes, I guess. It's the one I am going to use to try some of Nancy
Silverton's recipes.

I could never get ANYWHERE with Carl's, at all. Not that it didn't taste ok,
but it was flat, and thicker than a doorstop. I am quite sure I was doing
something wrong, but it was so fussy, I just gave up on it.
gw

"doughwizard" > wrote in message =
ups.com...

> I think that the possibility here is that this starter may contain
> commercial yeast rather than wild yeast cultures ...=20

The Wizard is most astute -- that possibility was also pointed out
by Mrs. Wood:=20

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...berhighway.net


* * * * *=20

"gw" > wrote in message =
...

> I could never get ANYWHERE with Carl's, at all....
> I like the starter yeast from King Arthur, it's the French sourdough,
> one begins with one quarter teaspoon, and refreshes from there ...=20

So, Wizard, there is your answer:

Item # 1039 at http://shop.bakerscatalogue.com/items/

Or you might one of the Wood's cultures at: www.sourdo.com

Among others, they have one they say comes from France.

"doughwizard" > wrote in message =
ups.com...

> I think that the possibility here is that this starter may contain
> commercial yeast rather than wild yeast cultures ...=20

The Wizard is most astute -- that possibility was also pointed out
by Mrs. Wood:=20

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...berhighway.net


* * * * *=20

"gw" > wrote in message =
...

> I could never get ANYWHERE with Carl's, at all....
> I like the starter yeast from King Arthur, it's the French sourdough,
> one begins with one quarter teaspoon, and refreshes from there ...=20

So, Wizard, there is your answer:

Item # 1039 at http://shop.bakerscatalogue.com/items/

Or you might one of the Wood's cultures at: www.sourdo.com

Among others, they have one they say comes from France.

>Which also makes me think that yes this culture does contain *some*
commercial yeast

A natural culture can never contain commercial yeast ,but strains
related to the same genus can exist in natural starters and this what
confuses some investigators who that insist that bakers yeast ( or
they immediately recognize as S. cereviseae) cannot survive in the
acidic conditions of the starters. That is if the kept on thinking
that saccharomyces cerevisease is just bakers yeast and nothing else.
But there are more than 40 types of Saccharomyces and bakes yeast is
just one, another one in wine, for spirits and for beer etc., more on
the wild yeast area which are tolerant to adverse conditions than
the cultured ones used in normal baking and beverages and was one
time re classified under the name saccharomyces cerevisieae!
Therefore the mildness of some starters is caused by the presence of
these species not necessarily the Candida milliere associated with San
Francisco., or the population density of other yeast surpass the
candida milliere.
Now these other saccharomyces are not that acid tolerant like the C.
milliere, but exist only in less acidic conditions.
Therefore this seems to coincide with the French investigators
findings( in my previous posts) that subspecies of Saccharomyces
cereviseae can dominate in milder starters which is common in French
sourdoughs and classified under the same name due to similar
microbiological characteristics.. Other species of yeast were also
found not belonging t the Saccharomyces.
But there are some strains that Candida millere is the dominant yeast
and its usually in the acidic type of French levain which coincides
with organisms found in the San Francisco sourdough and other
related more acidic culture characteristics.

Be reminded that yeast classification is ever evolving and that
confuses layman and even scientific professionals in other fields who
want to get a consistent classification in this particular microbe when
they encounter this in their research work. This reason may have
affected earlier investigators conclusion that all strains of
saccharomyces cereviseae cannot survive in the acidic nature of
sourdough cultures which is erroneous as what later investigator founds
out elsewhere.

>A number of microbioligists have tested starters and found that bakers
yeast will not survive more than two refreshments in a starter. The
acidity is high enough >that bakers yeast can not survive.
Again I reiterate that....
Generally bakers yeast cannot survive extreme acidic conditions; but
there are yeast strains belonging to the same species that are hardy
enough and incidentally they are classified as saccharomyces
cerevisiae. Which I mentioned above.
Besides bakers who added yeast in the sourdough place it on the dough
preparation side which has milder pH conditions and never in the
starter side( which is more acidic).

I think this what should the people of Carl Sourdough Starters to look
into , and investigate the nature of their culture flora and establish
the population density of different yeasts species that can coexist n
their culture like what the French investigators did with their Levain
( as they cannot understand previously )why in many parts of France
the natural sourdough is milder while in certain areas its more acidic
..And bakers and consumers there noticed that their bread sometimes
fluctuates in flavor and taste when its known to be made wholly from
natural starters that had been maintained for generations.
And not just assume that all sourdough cultures is populated by only
two microbes:
The candida milliere and the lactobacilli L brevis variety Lindniere(
Aka L. Sanfranciscensis).
It must not be forgotten that French flour had moderate ash content
that is similar with the American clear flours and seldom use lower ash
flours for breadmaking but only for pastry anc cake baking.

Sourdough enthusiasts should not have their eyes glazed by the stature
of the earlier investigator like Kline, Sugihara, Gantzle etc who
only focus their attention on the usual tandem of L San Francisco and C
milliere. And forget (or not believe ) other equally competent but not
popular researchers findings (whose works were never published in
English language) and discovered other critters that can exist also in
natural sourdough cultures.
Besides it must not be forgotten that aside from the Saccharomyces
there are other specie like the hansenula, torupsis and pichia that can
exist also in natural starters and that can also affect the variability
of sourdough tastes.
Roy

>Which also makes me think that yes this culture does contain *some*
commercial yeast

A natural culture can never contain commercial yeast ,but strains
related to the same genus can exist in natural starters and this what
confuses some investigators who that insist that bakers yeast ( or
they immediately recognize as S. cereviseae) cannot survive in the
acidic conditions of the starters. That is if the kept on thinking
that saccharomyces cerevisease is just bakers yeast and nothing else.
But there are more than 40 types of Saccharomyces and bakes yeast is
just one, another one in wine, for spirits and for beer etc., more on
the wild yeast area which are tolerant to adverse conditions than
the cultured ones used in normal baking and beverages and was one
time re classified under the name saccharomyces cerevisieae!
Therefore the mildness of some starters is caused by the presence of
these species not necessarily the Candida milliere associated with San
Francisco., or the population density of other yeast surpass the
candida milliere.
Now these other saccharomyces are not that acid tolerant like the C.
milliere, but exist only in less acidic conditions.
Therefore this seems to coincide with the French investigators
findings( in my previous posts) that subspecies of Saccharomyces
cereviseae can dominate in milder starters which is common in French
sourdoughs and classified under the same name due to similar
microbiological characteristics.. Other species of yeast were also
found not belonging t the Saccharomyces.
But there are some strains that Candida millere is the dominant yeast
and its usually in the acidic type of French levain which coincides
with organisms found in the San Francisco sourdough and other
related more acidic culture characteristics.

Be reminded that yeast classification is ever evolving and that
confuses layman and even scientific professionals in other fields who
want to get a consistent classification in this particular microbe when
they encounter this in their research work. This reason may have
affected earlier investigators conclusion that all strains of
saccharomyces cereviseae cannot survive in the acidic nature of
sourdough cultures which is erroneous as what later investigator founds
out elsewhere.

>A number of microbioligists have tested starters and found that bakers
yeast will not survive more than two refreshments in a starter. The
acidity is high enough >that bakers yeast can not survive.
Again I reiterate that....
Generally bakers yeast cannot survive extreme acidic conditions; but
there are yeast strains belonging to the same species that are hardy
enough and incidentally they are classified as saccharomyces
cerevisiae. Which I mentioned above.
Besides bakers who added yeast in the sourdough place it on the dough
preparation side which has milder pH conditions and never in the
starter side( which is more acidic).

I think this what should the people of Carl Sourdough Starters to look
into , and investigate the nature of their culture flora and establish
the population density of different yeasts species that can coexist n
their culture like what the French investigators did with their Levain
( as they cannot understand previously )why in many parts of France
the natural sourdough is milder while in certain areas its more acidic
..And bakers and consumers there noticed that their bread sometimes
fluctuates in flavor and taste when its known to be made wholly from
natural starters that had been maintained for generations.
And not just assume that all sourdough cultures is populated by only
two microbes:
The candida milliere and the lactobacilli L brevis variety Lindniere(
Aka L. Sanfranciscensis).
It must not be forgotten that French flour had moderate ash content
that is similar with the American clear flours and seldom use lower ash
flours for breadmaking but only for pastry anc cake baking.

Sourdough enthusiasts should not have their eyes glazed by the stature
of the earlier investigator like Kline, Sugihara, Gantzle etc who
only focus their attention on the usual tandem of L San Francisco and C
milliere. And forget (or not believe ) other equally competent but not
popular researchers findings (whose works were never published in
English language) and discovered other critters that can exist also in
natural sourdough cultures.
Besides it must not be forgotten that aside from the Saccharomyces
there are other specie like the hansenula, torupsis and pichia that can
exist also in natural starters and that can also affect the variability
of sourdough tastes.
Roy

Roy wrote:
>>Which also makes me think that yes this culture does contain *some*
>
> commercial yeast
>
> A natural culture can never contain commercial yeast ,but strains
> related to the same genus can exist in natural starters and this what
> confuses some investigators who that insist that bakers yeast ( or
> they immediately recognize as S. cereviseae) cannot survive in the
> acidic conditions of the starters. That is if the kept on thinking
> that saccharomyces cerevisease is just bakers yeast and nothing else.
> But there are more than 40 types of Saccharomyces and bakes yeast is
> just one, another one in wine, for spirits and for beer etc., more on
> the wild yeast area which are tolerant to adverse conditions than
> the cultured ones used in normal baking and beverages and was one
> time re classified under the name saccharomyces cerevisieae!
> Therefore the mildness of some starters is caused by the presence of
> these species not necessarily the Candida milliere associated with San
> Francisco., or the population density of other yeast surpass the
> candida milliere.
> Now these other saccharomyces are not that acid tolerant like the C.
> milliere, but exist only in less acidic conditions.
> Therefore this seems to coincide with the French investigators
> findings( in my previous posts) that subspecies of Saccharomyces
> cereviseae can dominate in milder starters which is common in French
> sourdoughs and classified under the same name due to similar
> microbiological characteristics.. Other species of yeast were also
> found not belonging t the Saccharomyces.
> But there are some strains that Candida millere is the dominant yeast
> and its usually in the acidic type of French levain which coincides
> with organisms found in the San Francisco sourdough and other
> related more acidic culture characteristics.
>
> Be reminded that yeast classification is ever evolving and that
> confuses layman and even scientific professionals in other fields who
> want to get a consistent classification in this particular microbe when
> they encounter this in their research work. This reason may have
> affected earlier investigators conclusion that all strains of
> saccharomyces cereviseae cannot survive in the acidic nature of
> sourdough cultures which is erroneous as what later investigator founds
> out elsewhere.
>
>
>>A number of microbioligists have tested starters and found that bakers
>
> yeast will not survive more than two refreshments in a starter. The
> acidity is high enough >that bakers yeast can not survive.
> Again I reiterate that....
> Generally bakers yeast cannot survive extreme acidic conditions; but
> there are yeast strains belonging to the same species that are hardy
> enough and incidentally they are classified as saccharomyces
> cerevisiae. Which I mentioned above.
> Besides bakers who added yeast in the sourdough place it on the dough
> preparation side which has milder pH conditions and never in the
> starter side( which is more acidic).
>
> I think this what should the people of Carl Sourdough Starters to look
> into , and investigate the nature of their culture flora and establish
> the population density of different yeasts species that can coexist n
> their culture like what the French investigators did with their Levain
> ( as they cannot understand previously )why in many parts of France
> the natural sourdough is milder while in certain areas its more acidic
> .And bakers and consumers there noticed that their bread sometimes
> fluctuates in flavor and taste when its known to be made wholly from
> natural starters that had been maintained for generations.
> And not just assume that all sourdough cultures is populated by only
> two microbes:
> The candida milliere and the lactobacilli L brevis variety Lindniere(
> Aka L. Sanfranciscensis).
> It must not be forgotten that French flour had moderate ash content
> that is similar with the American clear flours and seldom use lower ash
> flours for breadmaking but only for pastry anc cake baking.
>
> Sourdough enthusiasts should not have their eyes glazed by the stature
> of the earlier investigator like Kline, Sugihara, Gantzle etc who
> only focus their attention on the usual tandem of L San Francisco and C
> milliere. And forget (or not believe ) other equally competent but not
> popular researchers findings (whose works were never published in
> English language) and discovered other critters that can exist also in
> natural sourdough cultures.
> Besides it must not be forgotten that aside from the Saccharomyces
> there are other specie like the hansenula, torupsis and pichia that can
> exist also in natural starters and that can also affect the variability
> of sourdough tastes.
> Roy
>
I think if you trace Jean Wood's statement back, you will see that she
said that the bread machine recipe that was posted using Carl's starter
is what contains the commercial yeast, not the starter itself,
Ellen

"Roy" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> >Which also makes me think that yes this culture does contain *some*
> commercial yeast
>>
> Be reminded that yeast classification is ever evolving and that
> confuses layman and even scientific professionals in other fields who
> want to get a consistent classification in this particular microbe when
> they encounter this in their research work.

Roy: have you seen the following article?
Graham

Nature 434, 636 - 640 (31 March 2005); doi:10.1038/nature03405



Sex increases the efficacy of natural selection in experimental yeast
populations

MATTHEW R. GODDARD*, H. CHARLES J. GODFRAY & AUSTIN BURT

NERC Centre for Population Biology and Department of Biological
Sciences, Imperial College London, Silwood Park Campus, Ascot SL5 7PY,
UK
* Present address: School of Biological Sciences, The University of
Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand


Why sex evolved and persists is a problem for evolutionary biology,
because sex disrupts favourable gene combinations and requires an
expenditure of time and energy. Further, in organisms with
unequal-sized gametes, the female transmits her genes at only half the
rate of an asexual equivalent (the twofold cost of sex). Many modern
theories that provide an explanation for the advantage of sex
incorporate an idea originally proposed by Weismann more than 100 years
ago: sex allows natural selection to proceed more effectively because
it increases genetic variation. Here we test this hypothesis, which
still lacks robust empirical support, with the use of experiments on
yeast populations. Capitalizing on recent advances in the molecular
biology of recombination in yeast, we produced by genetic manipulation
strains that differed only in their capacity for sexual reproduction.
We show that, as predicted by the theory, sex increases the rate of
adaptation to a new harsh environment but has no measurable effect on
fitness in a new benign environment where there is little selection.

http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPa...e03405_fs.html

"Roy" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> >Which also makes me think that yes this culture does contain *some*
> commercial yeast
>>
> Be reminded that yeast classification is ever evolving and that
> confuses layman and even scientific professionals in other fields who
> want to get a consistent classification in this particular microbe when
> they encounter this in their research work.

Roy: have you seen the following article?
Graham

Nature 434, 636 - 640 (31 March 2005); doi:10.1038/nature03405



Sex increases the efficacy of natural selection in experimental yeast
populations

MATTHEW R. GODDARD*, H. CHARLES J. GODFRAY & AUSTIN BURT

NERC Centre for Population Biology and Department of Biological
Sciences, Imperial College London, Silwood Park Campus, Ascot SL5 7PY,
UK
* Present address: School of Biological Sciences, The University of
Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand


Why sex evolved and persists is a problem for evolutionary biology,
because sex disrupts favourable gene combinations and requires an
expenditure of time and energy. Further, in organisms with
unequal-sized gametes, the female transmits her genes at only half the
rate of an asexual equivalent (the twofold cost of sex). Many modern
theories that provide an explanation for the advantage of sex
incorporate an idea originally proposed by Weismann more than 100 years
ago: sex allows natural selection to proceed more effectively because
it increases genetic variation. Here we test this hypothesis, which
still lacks robust empirical support, with the use of experiments on
yeast populations. Capitalizing on recent advances in the molecular
biology of recombination in yeast, we produced by genetic manipulation
strains that differed only in their capacity for sexual reproduction.
We show that, as predicted by the theory, sex increases the rate of
adaptation to a new harsh environment but has no measurable effect on
fitness in a new benign environment where there is little selection.

http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPa...e03405_fs.html

"ellen wickberg" > wrote in message =
news:OtW2e.863544$6l.808407@pd7tw2no...

> I think if you trace Jean Wood's statement back, you will see that she =

> said that the bread machine recipe that was posted using Carl's =
starter=20
> is what contains the commercial yeast, not the starter itself

That is true. Carl's brochure does sometimes suggest the use of bakers'
yeast along with sourdough culture as leavening, and it is that to which
the quoted post refers. The brochure is a compendium of recipes which
Carl collected, and which he distributed with his starts. It is, at =
this=20
point in time, a historic document.

As far as my recollection, that Mrs. Wood has charged that Carl's =
starter
is based on bakers' yeast, is concerned -- I cannot find the =
documentation
for it. So perhaps she never said it, and my memory is a fault.

Carl's starts (then and now) revive much more rapidly and energetically=20
than the SDI starts typically do. So that is a mystery that could =
stimulate=20
their imagination.

Dry starts, I think, should be dated, as their vitality decays on the =
shelf.

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

"ellen wickberg" > wrote in message =
news:OtW2e.863544$6l.808407@pd7tw2no...

> I think if you trace Jean Wood's statement back, you will see that she =

> said that the bread machine recipe that was posted using Carl's =
starter=20
> is what contains the commercial yeast, not the starter itself

That is true. Carl's brochure does sometimes suggest the use of bakers'
yeast along with sourdough culture as leavening, and it is that to which
the quoted post refers. The brochure is a compendium of recipes which
Carl collected, and which he distributed with his starts. It is, at =
this=20
point in time, a historic document.

As far as my recollection, that Mrs. Wood has charged that Carl's =
starter
is based on bakers' yeast, is concerned -- I cannot find the =
documentation
for it. So perhaps she never said it, and my memory is a fault.

Carl's starts (then and now) revive much more rapidly and energetically=20
than the SDI starts typically do. So that is a mystery that could =
stimulate=20
their imagination.

Dry starts, I think, should be dated, as their vitality decays on the =
shelf.

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

graham wrote:
>> Roy: have you seen the following article?
> Graham
>
> Nature 434, 636 - 640 (31 March 2005); doi:10.1038/nature03405
>
>
>
> Sex increases the efficacy of natural selection in experimental yeast
> populations
>
>
> Why sex evolved and persists is a problem for evolutionary biology,
> because sex disrupts favourable gene combinations and requires an
> expenditure of time and energy. Further, in organisms with
> unequal-sized gametes, the female transmits her genes at only half
the
> rate of an asexual equivalent (the twofold cost of sex

No I based my premises on a monograph by T. Deak a renowned Hungarian
scientist in Budapest University who was devoted so much time to yeast
research.He authored a specialized book which was a comprehensive
study of that particular yeasts that is related to spoilage: T. Deak
and Beuchat I.R.(1995) Handbook of food spoilage yeast. CRC press Boca
Raton Florida.
Incidentally the Saccharomyces cerevesieae is classified both as
beneficial and spoilage yeast!
>From his studies I learned that there are two kinds of yeast
according to how they propagate:
The teleomorph( perfect ) which can sporulate due to sexual
reproduction and the anamorph( imperfect) which can only multiply by
budding.
Now as applied to Sourdough yeast known as Candida milliere( the likely
sporulating form (or teleomorph) but which can co-exist in tandem with
lactobacillus Brevis var Lindniere mostly in the imperfect state or
anamorphic form called as torulopsis holmii
According to Dr. Deak, yeast are classified primarily by their mode of
sexual reproduction , i.e, sporulation which is characteristics of the
saccharomyces species;.It forms spores by conjugations of the opposite
mating type and spores develop after meiotic( formation of egg and
sperm) division of diploid cells( or one chromosome per mating type)
and form a sporangium.( or spore sac)..
Other forms of yeast multiply by budding .And this propagation methods
adds complication to the nomenclature like for example the
Saccharomyces Exiguus which is another name for Torulopsis holmii and
candida milliere. That is why even in this particular area the
nomenclature is hazy and evolving and if they want to understand the
differences they have to refer to older forms of classification.
This also what makes saccharomyces cereviseae term confusing?
The tamed or cultured ones are also classified under this name as well
as the wild yeast that is responsible for food spoilage and other forms
of non fastidious behavior with regards to substrates.
Therefo
There is a specific or highly selective culture media used in
isolating the desired saccharomyces which is beneficial for the food
industry and even the wild yeastin order to identify and confirm its
presence.

So if anybody says that this particular name is just bakers yeast he or
she is wrong.
Roy

graham wrote:
>> Roy: have you seen the following article?
> Graham
>
> Nature 434, 636 - 640 (31 March 2005); doi:10.1038/nature03405
>
>
>
> Sex increases the efficacy of natural selection in experimental yeast
> populations
>
>
> Why sex evolved and persists is a problem for evolutionary biology,
> because sex disrupts favourable gene combinations and requires an
> expenditure of time and energy. Further, in organisms with
> unequal-sized gametes, the female transmits her genes at only half
the
> rate of an asexual equivalent (the twofold cost of sex

No I based my premises on a monograph by T. Deak a renowned Hungarian
scientist in Budapest University who was devoted so much time to yeast
research.He authored a specialized book which was a comprehensive
study of that particular yeasts that is related to spoilage: T. Deak
and Beuchat I.R.(1995) Handbook of food spoilage yeast. CRC press Boca
Raton Florida.
Incidentally the Saccharomyces cerevesieae is classified both as
beneficial and spoilage yeast!
>From his studies I learned that there are two kinds of yeast
according to how they propagate:
The teleomorph( perfect ) which can sporulate due to sexual
reproduction and the anamorph( imperfect) which can only multiply by
budding.
Now as applied to Sourdough yeast known as Candida milliere( the likely
sporulating form (or teleomorph) but which can co-exist in tandem with
lactobacillus Brevis var Lindniere mostly in the imperfect state or
anamorphic form called as torulopsis holmii
According to Dr. Deak, yeast are classified primarily by their mode of
sexual reproduction , i.e, sporulation which is characteristics of the
saccharomyces species;.It forms spores by conjugations of the opposite
mating type and spores develop after meiotic( formation of egg and
sperm) division of diploid cells( or one chromosome per mating type)
and form a sporangium.( or spore sac)..
Other forms of yeast multiply by budding .And this propagation methods
adds complication to the nomenclature like for example the
Saccharomyces Exiguus which is another name for Torulopsis holmii and
candida milliere. That is why even in this particular area the
nomenclature is hazy and evolving and if they want to understand the
differences they have to refer to older forms of classification.
This also what makes saccharomyces cereviseae term confusing?
The tamed or cultured ones are also classified under this name as well
as the wild yeast that is responsible for food spoilage and other forms
of non fastidious behavior with regards to substrates.
Therefo
There is a specific or highly selective culture media used in
isolating the desired saccharomyces which is beneficial for the food
industry and even the wild yeastin order to identify and confirm its
presence.

So if anybody says that this particular name is just bakers yeast he or
she is wrong.
Roy

"Roy" > wrote in message=20
ps.com...

> ... if anybody says that this particular name (presumably S. =
cerevisiae),=20
> is just bakers yeast he or she is wrong.

How about: baker's yeast is S. cerevisiae, and it does not belong in
sourdough.

Roy, here is some ammunition for your long technical quotes:

http://www.yeastgenome.org/


"graham" > in message=20
news:tZX2e.863771$6l.423889@pd7tw2no...
reminded us that

> "sex increases the rate of adaptation to a new harsh=20
> environment but has no measurable effect on fitness in
> a new benign environment where there is little selection."

Well, frankly, no one among us knows what is going on in
our starter culture. (Who, in fact, can be absolutely sure=20
what is going on in our family, or, for that matter, our
sociologic cohort?)

I'd guess, however, that things are quieter in white batter
cultures than in organic whole-grain rye glop.

--
DickA

>How about: baker's yeast is S. cerevisiae, and it does not belong in
>sourdough.

Just like what I mentioned in earlier post....
That S cereviseae can exist in sourdough cultures ....most popularly
in many French levain culture as proven by the study...but its not
necessarily the same yeast that bakers add but a wild form of S.
cereviseae which has better tolerance to lower pH than normal bakers
yeast.

>Roy, here is some ammunition for your long technical quotes:
Thanks dick ...but .....I had already fired my guns <g>... but don't
worry
When its time to reload .....I will see to it if that type of
'separate loading shell' is compatible with my guns and how much
powder charge do I have to load with it.<g>
Roy

My experience with Carl's is that I have never in the ~40 years that I have
been baking bread had greater success. The flavor and loft of Carl's loaves
are superb. The crumb and crust are to-die-for. It's the best $.74 I have
ever spent.
Michelle

My experience with Carl's is that I have never in the ~40 years that I have
been baking bread had greater success. The flavor and loft of Carl's loaves
are superb. The crumb and crust are to-die-for. It's the best $.74 I have
ever spent.
Michelle

That is the thing though I don't want to buy a culture anymore now I
want to start one. I think that most "starters" that you buy contain
regular yeast and that explains the fast rising time and dullness of
flavor seen by most people with the carl starter etc.

I'm going to start my own starter is there anybody here who has done
this b4. (NOT using any form of dried starter, just flour and water) I
know it will take awhile but really want to get a good starter going
that will keep forever. I have baked quite a bit, not worried about
that at all, just need to get the starter "started".

Dick Adams wrote:
> "doughwizard" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> > I think that the possibility here is that this starter may contain
> > commercial yeast rather than wild yeast cultures ...
>
> The Wizard is most astute -- that possibility was also pointed out
> by Mrs. Wood:
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...berhighway.net
>
>
> * * * * *
>
> "gw" > wrote in message
...
>
> > I could never get ANYWHERE with Carl's, at all....
> > I like the starter yeast from King Arthur, it's the French
sourdough,
> > one begins with one quarter teaspoon, and refreshes from there ...
>
> So, Wizard, there is your answer:
>
> Item # 1039 at http://shop.bakerscatalogue.com/items/
>
> Or you might one of the Wood's cultures at: www.sourdo.com
>
> Among others, they have one they say comes from France.

That is the thing though I don't want to buy a culture anymore now I
want to start one. I think that most "starters" that you buy contain
regular yeast and that explains the fast rising time and dullness of
flavor seen by most people with the carl starter etc.

I'm going to start my own starter is there anybody here who has done
this b4. (NOT using any form of dried starter, just flour and water) I
know it will take awhile but really want to get a good starter going
that will keep forever. I have baked quite a bit, not worried about
that at all, just need to get the starter "started".

Dick Adams wrote:
> "doughwizard" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> > I think that the possibility here is that this starter may contain
> > commercial yeast rather than wild yeast cultures ...
>
> The Wizard is most astute -- that possibility was also pointed out
> by Mrs. Wood:
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...berhighway.net
>
>
> * * * * *
>
> "gw" > wrote in message
...
>
> > I could never get ANYWHERE with Carl's, at all....
> > I like the starter yeast from King Arthur, it's the French
sourdough,
> > one begins with one quarter teaspoon, and refreshes from there ...
>
> So, Wizard, there is your answer:
>
> Item # 1039 at http://shop.bakerscatalogue.com/items/
>
> Or you might one of the Wood's cultures at: www.sourdo.com
>
> Among others, they have one they say comes from France.

That is the thing though I don't want to buy a culture anymore now I
want to start one. I think that most "starters" that you buy contain
regular yeast and that explains the fast rising time and dullness of
flavor seen by most people with the carl starter etc.

I'm going to start my own starter is there anybody here who has done
this b4. (NOT using any form of dried starter, just flour and water) I
know it will take awhile but really want to get a good starter going
that will keep forever. I have baked quite a bit, not worried about
that at all, just need to get the starter "started".

Dick Adams wrote:
> "doughwizard" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> > I think that the possibility here is that this starter may contain
> > commercial yeast rather than wild yeast cultures ...
>
> The Wizard is most astute -- that possibility was also pointed out
> by Mrs. Wood:
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...berhighway.net
>
>
> * * * * *
>
> "gw" > wrote in message
...
>
> > I could never get ANYWHERE with Carl's, at all....
> > I like the starter yeast from King Arthur, it's the French
sourdough,
> > one begins with one quarter teaspoon, and refreshes from there ...
>
> So, Wizard, there is your answer:
>
> Item # 1039 at http://shop.bakerscatalogue.com/items/
>
> Or you might one of the Wood's cultures at: www.sourdo.com
>
> Among others, they have one they say comes from France.

doughwizard wrote:

>That is the thing though I don't want to buy a culture anymore now I
>want to start one. I think that most "starters" that you buy contain
>regular yeast and that explains the fast rising time and dullness of
>flavor seen by most people with the carl starter etc.
>
>I'm going to start my own starter is there anybody here who has done
>this b4. (NOT using any form of dried starter, just flour and water) I
>know it will take awhile but really want to get a good starter going
>that will keep forever. I have baked quite a bit, not worried about
>that at all, just need to get the starter "started".
>
>
>
Creating my own starter was the only reason I started doing sourdough!
The FAQ has a reasonable description of how to do this, which I followed
with supplemental advice from other sources.

Some of the puzzles I found:
1) the cycle of "feeding" a small portion of the "beasties" and
discarding a majority of the population and providing ample food for the
remainder <and repeat over several days>. I have not found a good
explanation of this method, but I suspect that it involves taking the
colonies of bacteria and yeast and letting them go through multiple
generations to stabilize.

2) when is it ready? Some suggest it is by "bubbles", others by smell,
others by taste.

Some activities I believe made my efforts successful:
1) when feeding, whip the mixture to incorporate sufficient oxygen; as a
homebrewer, this is important for the early cycles of yeast maturation
and colony growth. I believe that this also puts more of your local
ecosystem into the mix as well - the FAQ mentions fanning, which could
also be helpful.

2) moderate warmth - don't overdo the heat either way.

>Dick Adams wrote:
>
>
>>"doughwizard" > wrote in message
>>
>>
oups.com...
>
>
>>>I think that the possibility here is that this starter may contain
>>>commercial yeast rather than wild yeast cultures ...
>>>
>>>
>>The Wizard is most astute -- that possibility was also pointed out
>>by Mrs. Wood:
>>
>>http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...berhighway.net
>>
>>
>> * * * * *
>>
>>"gw" > wrote in message
>>
>>
...
>
>
>>>I could never get ANYWHERE with Carl's, at all....
>>>I like the starter yeast from King Arthur, it's the French
>>>
>>>
>sourdough,
>
>
>>>one begins with one quarter teaspoon, and refreshes from there ...
>>>
>>>
>>So, Wizard, there is your answer:
>>
>>Item # 1039 at http://shop.bakerscatalogue.com/items/
>>
>>Or you might one of the Wood's cultures at: www.sourdo.com
>>
>>Among others, they have one they say comes from France.
>>
>>
>
>
>

doughwizard wrote:

>That is the thing though I don't want to buy a culture anymore now I
>want to start one. I think that most "starters" that you buy contain
>regular yeast and that explains the fast rising time and dullness of
>flavor seen by most people with the carl starter etc.
>
>I'm going to start my own starter is there anybody here who has done
>this b4. (NOT using any form of dried starter, just flour and water) I
>know it will take awhile but really want to get a good starter going
>that will keep forever. I have baked quite a bit, not worried about
>that at all, just need to get the starter "started".
>
>
>
Creating my own starter was the only reason I started doing sourdough!
The FAQ has a reasonable description of how to do this, which I followed
with supplemental advice from other sources.

Some of the puzzles I found:
1) the cycle of "feeding" a small portion of the "beasties" and
discarding a majority of the population and providing ample food for the
remainder <and repeat over several days>. I have not found a good
explanation of this method, but I suspect that it involves taking the
colonies of bacteria and yeast and letting them go through multiple
generations to stabilize.

2) when is it ready? Some suggest it is by "bubbles", others by smell,
others by taste.

Some activities I believe made my efforts successful:
1) when feeding, whip the mixture to incorporate sufficient oxygen; as a
homebrewer, this is important for the early cycles of yeast maturation
and colony growth. I believe that this also puts more of your local
ecosystem into the mix as well - the FAQ mentions fanning, which could
also be helpful.

2) moderate warmth - don't overdo the heat either way.

>Dick Adams wrote:
>
>
>>"doughwizard" > wrote in message
>>
>>
oups.com...
>
>
>>>I think that the possibility here is that this starter may contain
>>>commercial yeast rather than wild yeast cultures ...
>>>
>>>
>>The Wizard is most astute -- that possibility was also pointed out
>>by Mrs. Wood:
>>
>>http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...berhighway.net
>>
>>
>> * * * * *
>>
>>"gw" > wrote in message
>>
>>
...
>
>
>>>I could never get ANYWHERE with Carl's, at all....
>>>I like the starter yeast from King Arthur, it's the French
>>>
>>>
>sourdough,
>
>
>>>one begins with one quarter teaspoon, and refreshes from there ...
>>>
>>>
>>So, Wizard, there is your answer:
>>
>>Item # 1039 at http://shop.bakerscatalogue.com/items/
>>
>>Or you might one of the Wood's cultures at: www.sourdo.com
>>
>>Among others, they have one they say comes from France.
>>
>>
>
>
>

doughwizard wrote:

>That is the thing though I don't want to buy a culture anymore now I
>want to start one. I think that most "starters" that you buy contain
>regular yeast and that explains the fast rising time and dullness of
>flavor seen by most people with the carl starter etc.
>
>I'm going to start my own starter is there anybody here who has done
>this b4. (NOT using any form of dried starter, just flour and water) I
>know it will take awhile but really want to get a good starter going
>that will keep forever. I have baked quite a bit, not worried about
>that at all, just need to get the starter "started".
>
>
>
Creating my own starter was the only reason I started doing sourdough!
The FAQ has a reasonable description of how to do this, which I followed
with supplemental advice from other sources.

Some of the puzzles I found:
1) the cycle of "feeding" a small portion of the "beasties" and
discarding a majority of the population and providing ample food for the
remainder <and repeat over several days>. I have not found a good
explanation of this method, but I suspect that it involves taking the
colonies of bacteria and yeast and letting them go through multiple
generations to stabilize.

2) when is it ready? Some suggest it is by "bubbles", others by smell,
others by taste.

Some activities I believe made my efforts successful:
1) when feeding, whip the mixture to incorporate sufficient oxygen; as a
homebrewer, this is important for the early cycles of yeast maturation
and colony growth. I believe that this also puts more of your local
ecosystem into the mix as well - the FAQ mentions fanning, which could
also be helpful.

2) moderate warmth - don't overdo the heat either way.

>Dick Adams wrote:
>
>
>>"doughwizard" > wrote in message
>>
>>
oups.com...
>
>
>>>I think that the possibility here is that this starter may contain
>>>commercial yeast rather than wild yeast cultures ...
>>>
>>>
>>The Wizard is most astute -- that possibility was also pointed out
>>by Mrs. Wood:
>>
>>http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...berhighway.net
>>
>>
>> * * * * *
>>
>>"gw" > wrote in message
>>
>>
...
>
>
>>>I could never get ANYWHERE with Carl's, at all....
>>>I like the starter yeast from King Arthur, it's the French
>>>
>>>
>sourdough,
>
>
>>>one begins with one quarter teaspoon, and refreshes from there ...
>>>
>>>
>>So, Wizard, there is your answer:
>>
>>Item # 1039 at http://shop.bakerscatalogue.com/items/
>>
>>Or you might one of the Wood's cultures at: www.sourdo.com
>>
>>Among others, they have one they say comes from France.
>>
>>
>
>
>

I started mine a few weeks ago with the following procedu

100 g fine but whole ryeflour
100 ml water
mix and let rest for two days at approx. 25°C

100 g fine but whole ryeflour
100 ml water
add and let rest for one day/25°C

200 g fine but whole ryeflour
200 ml water
add and let rest for another day/25°C

Now the dough should taste and smell pretty sour so that you don`t find
it`s really tasty anymore.

Most probably there are bubbles which come from the wild yeast.


Now you have 750g sourdough which is ready for use.

Take away 70g and keep it as starter. Use the rest.

To make the next sourdough:
Mix the starter with
350 ml water
and add
350 g fine but whole ryeflour

let rest for one day 25°C.

I make very tasty bread with it and it is no wqaste of throwing anything
away.

By the way - you can take any flour but the process is most tasty for rye.

(a recipy from Germany - the sourdough-country :-D )

Joschi

I started mine a few weeks ago with the following procedu

100 g fine but whole ryeflour
100 ml water
mix and let rest for two days at approx. 25°C

100 g fine but whole ryeflour
100 ml water
add and let rest for one day/25°C

200 g fine but whole ryeflour
200 ml water
add and let rest for another day/25°C

Now the dough should taste and smell pretty sour so that you don`t find
it`s really tasty anymore.

Most probably there are bubbles which come from the wild yeast.


Now you have 750g sourdough which is ready for use.

Take away 70g and keep it as starter. Use the rest.

To make the next sourdough:
Mix the starter with
350 ml water
and add
350 g fine but whole ryeflour

let rest for one day 25°C.

I make very tasty bread with it and it is no wqaste of throwing anything
away.

By the way - you can take any flour but the process is most tasty for rye.

(a recipy from Germany - the sourdough-country :-D )

Joschi

I started mine a few weeks ago with the following procedu

100 g fine but whole ryeflour
100 ml water
mix and let rest for two days at approx. 25°C

100 g fine but whole ryeflour
100 ml water
add and let rest for one day/25°C

200 g fine but whole ryeflour
200 ml water
add and let rest for another day/25°C

Now the dough should taste and smell pretty sour so that you don`t find
it`s really tasty anymore.

Most probably there are bubbles which come from the wild yeast.


Now you have 750g sourdough which is ready for use.

Take away 70g and keep it as starter. Use the rest.

To make the next sourdough:
Mix the starter with
350 ml water
and add
350 g fine but whole ryeflour

let rest for one day 25°C.

I make very tasty bread with it and it is no wqaste of throwing anything
away.

By the way - you can take any flour but the process is most tasty for rye.

(a recipy from Germany - the sourdough-country :-D )

Joschi

"doughwizard" > wrote in message =
oups.com...

> I know it will take awhile but really want to get a good starter going
> that will keep forever.

Keeping forever is good, but you should also concentrate on getting
one that will make the sour and flavorful chewy golden brown loaves=20
with the big holes and the thick crunchy crust.=20

"doughwizard" > wrote in message =
oups.com...

> I know it will take awhile but really want to get a good starter going
> that will keep forever.

Keeping forever is good, but you should also concentrate on getting
one that will make the sour and flavorful chewy golden brown loaves=20
with the big holes and the thick crunchy crust.=20