Changes

==Obscure Alternative Grains=====Acidulated Malt===Acidulated malt (or acid malt) is often used in brewing to lower the mash pH when chemical acids (phosphoric or lactic acids) are not allowed or not desired. Acid malt is generally produced by one of three different methods. The first method to create acid malt is to hold germinating barley under anaerobic conditions for 24 hours or more to allow the lactic acid bacteria naturally found on the barley to produce lactic acid. The acidified barley is then kilned. A second method is to spray malt with ''[[Lactobacillus]]'' and then hold the malt at 50°C for 24-36 hours before kilning. The third method is to steep kilned malt in hot water at 45-50°C until the lactic acid bacteria naturally found on the malt (or sprayed onto it) produces around 1% lactic acid. The wet, acidic malt is then dried which concentrates the lactic acid to between 2 and 4% <ref name="Vaughan_2005">[https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/j.2050-0416.2005.tb00221.x Enhancing the Microbiological Stability of Malt and Beer — A Review. Anne Vaughan, Tadhg O'Sullivan, Douwe Van Sinderen. 2005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2050-0416.2005.tb00221.x.]</ref>. Due to the uncontrolled nature of lactic acid bacteria used in the production of acid malt, lactic acid levels can vary from maltster to maltster and potentially batch to batch.  ===Amaranth===* [https://www.facebook.com/milkthefunkthepodcast/posts/578420892491086 Vanderbilt University's Center for Latin American Studies and Tennessee State University along with Von Seitz Theoreticales presentation on amaranth in beer.]* [https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/plants/plants-11-00756/article_deploy/plants-11-00756.pdf Buckwheat and Amaranth as Raw Materials for Brewing, a Review.]* [https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3921/9/12/1236/htm A Review of Recent Studies on the Antioxidant Activities of a Third-Millennium Food: Amaranthus spp.] ===Buckwheat===* [https://www.facebook.com/groups/MilkTheFunk/permalink/1655836997777841/?match=YnVja3doZWF0 MTF thread on malted vs raw buckwheat.]* [https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/plants/plants-11-00756/article_deploy/plants-11-00756.pdf Buckwheat and Amaranth as Raw Materials for Brewing, a Review.] ===Millet===

Suppliers:* [http://www.coloradomaltingcompany.com/our-products.html?fref=gc&dti=Uses Specific to Funky592560317438853 Colorado Malting Company (sells direct)].* [https://grouseco.com/products/Sour Brewing?fref=gc&dti=592560317438853 The Grouse Malt House]. ===Quinoa===* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinoa Quinoa (To doquinua)]: a pseudocereal, it is advised to wash the plant and lightly scrub it to remove the "grainy/funky" character, and use a cereal mash. It is difficult to mill due to the small size of the seed <ref>[https://www.facebook.com/groups/MilkTheFunk/permalink/1820536414641231/?comment_id=1820620924632780&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R0%22%7D Manuel Taboada. Milk The Funk Facebook post on quinoa. 09/14/2017.]</ref>.* [http://scottjanish.com/peaches-and-quinoa-sour/ Scott Janish blog article on brewing sour beer with quinoa.] ===Rice===* [https://www.facebook.com/groups/MilkTheFunk/permalink/1747742851920588/ MTF threads on wild rice.]* [https://www.facebook.com/groups/MilkTheFunk/permalink/1751399461554927/ MTF thread on using sushi rice and "Sacch Trois" to make a DIPA with sake-like characteristics.] ===Rye===: <youtube width="300" height="200">4vhFfwOrIbA</youtube>

::<youtubewidth="300" height="200">5mttD027PMU</youtube>

In 2016 and 2017, Dr. Matt Bochman of Indiana University and Jeff Young of [http://blueowlbrewing.com/ Blue Owl Brewing ] conducted an experiment to map the microbiome of wort that was inoculated with several harvest years and harvests varieties of malted barley. Using DNA sequencing, they analyzed the microbes present in 110°F wort that was inoculated with crushed malted barley and incubated at 110°F for 0 hours, 24 hours, and 48 hours. The 7 malted grains that used to inoculate the wort were :  * 2015 Breiss Merit 57, * 2016 Breiss Merit 57, * 2015 Patagonia Sebastien, * 2015 Briess Copeland, * 2016 Blacklands Endeavor, * 2016 Breiss Synergy* 2016 Weyermann Barke The grain samples before inoculation hosted a large variety of microbes, but immediately after inoculating the malted grains into 110°F wort, all of the grain samples were dominated by ''Weissela cibaria'' (ranging from 92-99% across all samples), a Gram-positive lactic acid bacteria that is in the same order but a different family as ''Lactobacillus'' <ref>[https://www.microbiologyresearch.org/docserver/fulltext/micro/161/4/914_mic000053.pdf Genomics of Weissella cibaria with an examination of its metabolic traits. Kieran M. Lynch, Alan Lucid, Elke K. Arendt, Roy D. Sleator, Brigid Lucey and Aidan Coffey. 2015. DOI: 10.1099/mic.0.000053.]</ref>. All but one of the grain samples also had a much smaller but not insignificant population of ''Salmonella bongori'' (1-4% across all samples), which has been associated with non-lethal food poisoning <ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salmonella_bongori#Pathogenicity_and_epidemiology "Salmonella_bongori". Wikipedia. Retrieved 06/15/2017.]</ref>. There were also trace populations of other bacteria such as ''Enterobacter'' spp., ''Pantoea'' spp., ''Erwinia'' spp., and ''Lactococcus lactis'' in most of the samples. There was a significant ''L. lactics'' population in the 2016 Weyermann Barke, as well as ''Enterobacter aerogenes'' <ref name="blueowl_2017">[https://experiment.com/projects/mapping-the-sour-beer-microbiome/results "Mapping the sour beer microbiome". Matthew Bochman and Jeff Young. Experiment.com. 2017. Retrieved 06/15/2017.]</ref>.  After 24 hours of continued 110°F incubation in the wort, all but 2 samples were almost completely dominated by ''Weisella cibaria'' (98-99% across all samples). The 2016 Weyermann Barke also had a 5% population of ''Lactococcus lactis''. The 2016 Breiss Merit 57 was significantly different than the other grain samples, and was the only sample with a very large population of several species of ''Lactobacillus'' (38% ''Lactobacillus reuteri'', 23% ''Weissla cibaria'', 15% ''Lactobacillus delbruekii'', 12% ''Pedioccocus pentosaceus'', 8% ''Lactobacillus fermentum'', and 3% ''Lactobacillus helveticus''). This data indicates that ''Lactobacillus'' is generally not the dominant organism when inoculating with grain samples at this temperature, despite popular belief. It was the thought of the authors that ''Lactobacillus'' species might dominate at lower or higher temperatures, but more studies are needed to show this. In addition, only a very small population is required to begin with on samples that do, and once inoculated into wort at 110°F, their population will increase significantly <ref name="blueowl_2017" />. After 48 hours, ''Weissella cibaria'' continued to dominate all of the grain samples except the 2016 Breiss Merit 57 (note that the 2015 harvest of Breiss Merit 57 was dominated by ''Weisella cibaria'', indicating that the barley variety is not the determining factor of which microbes might be dominant, but that the harvest year is more important). Two samples, the 2015 Breiss Merit 57 and the 2016 Blacklands Endeavor, also saw an increase in the population of ''Shiggela sonnei'' (2.5%). The ''Salmonella bongori'' was still present in samples after 48 hours, but decreased to less than 1% <ref name="blueowl_2017" />.

The grain samples before inoculation hosted a large variety Some of microbes, but immediately after inoculating the malted grains into 110°F wort, all of the grain samples organic acids and alcohols were dominated by ''Weissela cibaria'' (ranging from 92-99% across all samples), a Gram-positive bacteria that is also measured in the same order but a different family as ''Lactobacillus''this experiment. All but one Most of the grain samples also had created fairly high and similar levels of lactic acid, followed by a much smaller but not insignificant population amount of ''Salmonella bongori'' (1-4% across all samples)acetic acid, which has been associated with non-lethal food poisoning <ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salmonella_bongori#Pathogenicity_and_epidemiology "Salmonella_bongori". Wikipedia. Retrieved 06/15/2017.]</ref>. There were also and then followed by trace populations amounts of other bacteria such as ''Enterobacter'' spp.citric, pyruvic, malic, ''Pantoea'' sppand succinic acids. The 2016 Breiss Synergy had much more lactic acid, ''Erwinia'' spp.acetic acid, and ''Lactococcus lactis'' in most of noticeably more succinic acid the all the other samples. There was It also had considerably more ethanol produced, indicating that a significant ''L. lactics'' population in the 2016 Weyermann Barke, as well as ''Enterobacter aerogenes'' heat tolerant wild yeast may have fermented this sample <ref name="blueowl_2017"/>. [[Butyric Acid]] and [[Isovaleric Acid]] were not measured due to the difficulty in measuring these acids at the lab that was used <ref>[https://experimentdrive.google.com/projects/mapping-the-sour-beer-microbiome/results "Mapping the sour beer microbiome". Matthew Bochman and Jeff Youngopen?id=1x6du2SvT2msELpMoW8TH5ecv9nz5dDJ8SqrI8y00GeI Edwards, John. Experiment.com. 2017Milk The Funk facebook group. Retrieved 0604/1524/2017.]</ref>.

After 24 hours of continued 110°F inoculation The experiment concluded that using grain to inoculate wort could potentially be done in the worta controlled manner, all but 2 samples were almost completely dominated by ''Weisella cibaria'' (98-99% across all samples)producing predictable and consistent results. The 2016 Weyermann Barke also had a small population of ''Lactococcus lactis'' (5%)It was stated that more studies need to be conducted to explore the variability in brewing process such as temperature and incubation times. The 2016 Breiss Merit 57 was significantly different than the other grain samplesFor example, and was while the only sample with a very large population of several species of ''Lactobacillus'' (38% ''Lactobacillus reuteri'', 23% ''Weissla Weisella cibaria''dominated at 110°F, 15% ''Lactobacillus delbruekii'', 12% ''Pedioccocus pentosaceus'', 8% ''Lactobacillus fermentum'it is reported that it doesn't tolerate temperatures above 113°F, and 3% ''Lactobacillus helveticus''). This data indicates that ''Lactobacillus'' is not present on all malted grain samples, despite popular belief. In addition, only a very small population is required to begin with on samples that do, and once inoculated into wort might dominate at temperatures around 90-95°F or maybe at 110°F, their population will increase significantly temperatures above 113°F <ref name="blueowl_2017" /><ref>Private correspondence with Jeff Young by Dan Pixley. 06/29/2017.</ref>.

After 48 hours, ''Weissella cibaria'' continued to dominate all Various concerns on possible cross contamination associated with the methodology of the grain samples except referenced experiment have been discussed with the 2016 Breiss Merit 57 (note that authors on [https://drive.google.com/open?id=1x6du2SvT2msELpMoW8TH5ecv9nz5dDJ8SqrI8y00GeI this MTF thread]. See also:* [https://experiment.com/projects/mapping-the 2015 Breiss Merit 57 was dominated -sour-beer-microbiome/results "Mapping the sour beer microbiome" by Matthew Bochman and Jeff Young.]* [https://www.facebook.com/groups/MilkTheFunk/permalink/1722624404432433/ ASBC presentation by ''Weisella cibaria'')Jeff Young. Two samples, the 2015 Breiss Merit 57 and the 2016 Blacklands Endeavor, also saw an increase in the population of ''Shiggela sonnei'' (2]* [https://www.5%)facebook. The com/groups/MilkTheFunk/permalink/2163890653639137/ Jeff Young''Salmonella bongori'' was still present in samples after 48 hours, but decreased to less than 1% <ref names microscopy testing souring wort with grains at different temperatures.] ===Spent Grain==="blueowl_2017" https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/>jam.13778

The American Society of Brewing Chemists created a method for malt sensory analysis that is more accurate for evaluating malt flavors than performing a [https://beerandbrewing.com/dictionary/EvJp0NBz6r/congress-mash/ congress mash] or simply chewing malted grain. The method is simple and can be done at home<ref>[http://blog.brewingwithbriess.com/malt-sensory-methods-you-can-perform-in-your-own-home-or-brewery/ Poirier, Cassie. "Malt Sensory Methods". Briess website. 02/08/2016. Retrieved 07/26/2018.]</ref>:

# Put the mixture into a thermos, and shake for 20 seconds.

# Pour the mixture through a coffee filter; leave for 30-45 mins to fully extract.# Cool the wort to room temperature, and serve no later than 4 hours from the preparation time.# Notes:::* Evaluate base malts as 100% of the sample, specialty malts with 50% of the specialty malt and 50% of a base malt, and dark-roasted malts with 15% of the dark-roasted malt and 75% of a base malt.::* If different samples are being prepared, clean the mill to avoid cross-contamination of differently flavored malts.::* Pour the entire sample into the filter at once so that the grains settle; filter paper should not have any aromas. The result is wort that serves approximately 6-8 people and is ideal for evaluating aroma, flavor, mouthfeel, and color of specific malts. See also:* [http://blog.brewingwithbriess.com/malt-sensory-methods-you-can-perform-in-your-own-home-or-brewery/ This Breiss blog post by Cassie Poirier] and this BeerSmith podcast (~19:20 minutes in): https://youtu.be/KbHVk5oafw4?t=19m30s.

The result is wort that * [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2PKFSJKcRA BeerSmith interview with Andrea Stanley and Lindsay Barr on how the hot steep method was produced, and how this sensory method is ideal for evaluating aroma, being used to identify flavordifferences in barley variety, mouthfeelmalt variety, and color of specific maltsetc.] * Breiss video demonstrating the Hot Steep Method:: <youtube width="300" height="200">NJWRpihU84Y</youtube>