A low pH does not determine the community dynamics of spontaneously developed backslopped liquid wheat sourdoughs but does influence their metabolite kinetics

Impact of process conditions on the microbial community dynamics and metabolite production kinetics of teff sourdough fermentations under bakery and laboratory conditions

“…Whereas the backslopped laboratory teff sourdough production TF1 was at its mature stage dominated by L. fermentum in the presence of L. sanfranciscensis, the backslopped laboratory teff sourdough production TF2 was dominated by W. cibaria throughout the whole backslopping period. This reflects differences in the microbial composition of the teff flour and processing conditions such as temperature and pH evolution (Van Kerrebroeck et al., ; Vrancken et al., ). During the L. sanfranciscensis IMDO 150101‐initiated teff sourdough fermentations, the added starter culture strain only prevailed at 23°C (solely) and in certain fermentations carried out at 30°C (in combination with L. fermentum , pediococci, and weissellas).…”

“…Presumably, the variations in composition of the three teff flours used contributed to the differences found in the evolution of pH and TTA, in particular during the first backslopping step of the backslopped teff sourdough productions. High TTA values reflect high concentrations of lactic acid and acetic acid, thanks to a high buffer capacity of teff flour due to its high ash content, and hence the dominance of mainly heterofermentative LAB species; in turn, they imply high acid tolerance of the dominating LAB and yeast species (Van Kerrebroeck et al., ). Furthermore, batch variations in dominating LAB and yeast species are common during sourdough productions and reflect not only the impact of isolation and identification procedures but also the quality of the flour in terms of age, microbial load, stability, etc ., as well as environmental contamination (De Vuyst et al., , ; Huys, Daniel, & De Vuyst, ; Minervini et al., ).…”

“…Both small‐scale fermentations in glass bottles (350 mL, dough yield of 400) and fermentor‐scale fermentations (8 L, dough yield of 400) were carried out. The former were performed to assess the impact of the temperature on the survival and prevalence of the L. sanfranciscensis strain used, whereas the latter allowed a comparison of teff fermentations with laboratory nonteff sourdough fermentations carried out before (Van der Meulen et al., ; Van Kerrebroeck, Bastos, Harth, & De Vuyst, ; Vrancken et al., ; Weckx, Van der Meulen, Allemeersch et al., ; Weckx, Van der Meulen, Maes et al., ). The flour‐water mixtures were inoculated with a cell suspension of the starter culture strain at a final concentration of 10 6 –10 7 colony forming units (CFUs)/mL.…”

Prevalence, Genetic Diversity, and Technological Functions of the Lactobacillus sanfranciscensis in Sourdough: A Review

“…Stress exposure has a significant role in enhancing several volatiles in sourdough during fermentation (Van Kerrebroeck, Bastos, Harth, & De Vuyst, 2016). Guerzoni, Vernocchi, Ndagijimana, Gianotti, and Lanciotti (2007) reported the production of alcohol and aroma in response to sublethal stress (acid, oxidative, and osmotic stress) exposure to L. sanfranciscensis in single and coculture with S. cerevisiae.…”

Monitoring of starter culture‐initiated liquid wheat and teff sourdough fermentations by selected ion flow tube‐mass spectrometry

“…Major applications of SIFT‐MS in the field of food and flavor analysis include the offline quality control and classification of food products, detection of volatile compounds associated with food spoilage, measurement of (enzymatically) produced volatile compounds in fruits and vegetables, and identification of volatile compounds produced upon thermal treatment of (dry) food products such as cocoa, nuts, and seeds . Online monitoring of food fermentation processes by SIFT‐MS has been limited to laboratory sourdough productions …”