Optimization of Mashing Conditions When Mashing with Unmalted Sorghum and Commercial Enzymes

Self Cite

The influence of two factors, total concentration and fraction of three pairs of commercial enzymes, which showed statistical significance (Biocellulase W with Hitempase 2XL, Biocellulase W with Amylo 300 and Amylo 300 with Hitempase 2XL), were studied for their overall effect on buckwheat wort quality using response surface methodology (RSM). This study revealed that the addition of increasing levels of Hitempase 2XL to the buckwheat mash increased colour, extract levels, wort filtration, fermentability and total fermentable extract (TFE), along with decreasing viscosity values. Results also determined a high level of fermentability when an enzyme combination of 30% Biocellulase and 70% Hitempase was added to the mash. The addition of increasing levels of Amylo 300 to buckwheat mashes resulted in increases in fermentability and total fermentable extract (TFE), along with increases in total soluble nitrogen (TSN), free amino nitrogen (FAN) and Kolbach index (KI). With regard to the proposed optimal regime, although no synergistic effect was found when the three enzymes were used together, the optimum conditions for the production of buckwheat wort with lowest viscosity, highest extract and optimal fermentability were achieved using a joint model. Overall, the findings of this study demonstrate the feasibility of producing wort suitable for the brewing of glutenfree beer from 100% malted buckwheat with careful optimisation of enzyme types and dosage levels.

Section: Preliminary Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of Response Surface Methodology to Investigate the Effectiveness of Commercial Enzymes on Buckwheat Malt for Brewing Purposes

Phiarais

Schehl

Oliveira

et al. 2006

Self Cite

“…More recent comprehensive reviews on brewing lager beer from sorghum, particularly, malted sorghum have been compiled by Agu and Palmer 2 and Owuama 38 . Due to problems associated with malted sorghum such as the development of insufficient diastatic power, limited protein modification, high malting costs, high malting losses, together with the need to supplement mashes with exogenous enzymes, it could seem more feasible to mash with unmalted grains and commercial enzymes 3,4,8,14,21,22,30,31 .…”

Section: -2863(9'8-32mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When mashing with unmalted sorghum and malted barley, double mash systems have been proposed 31 . When mashing with 100% unmalted sorghum, a single infusion mash, which is currently being used in the industrial production of sorghum lager beer is suggested [21][22][23]28,30,31,34 . This has temperature stands at 50°C, 80-90°C, and 60°C.…”

Section: -2863(9'8-32mentioning

confidence: 99%

Pilot Scale Production of a Lager Beer from a Grist Containing 50% Unmalted Sorghum

Goode

Arendt

2003

Self Cite

Pilot scale (1000 L) brews were carried out with a grist comprising of unmalted sorghum (50% of total wet weight of grain) (South African variety) and malted barley (50% of total wet weight of grain) grist using a mashing program with rests at 50°C, 95°C and 60°C. Mashes were supplemented with a high heat stable bacterial ␣-amylase, a bacterial neutral protease and a fungal ␣-amylase. A control brew containing 100% malted barley was also carried out. Saccharification difficulties were encountered during mashing, and extraction of the grist was lower for the sorghum mashes. The sorghum mashes showed comparable lautering behaviour to that of the control mash. At mashing off the sorghum worts were starch positive. Apparent degree of fermentation of the sorghum gyles were less than the control gyles. Green beer filtration proved unproblematic. The sorghum beers compared quite closely with the control beer with regard to colour, pH and colloidal stability. Foam stability deficiencies were apparent with the sorghum beer. However, the fermentability of the sorghum worts were lower. Hence the sorghum beers were lower in total alcohol. Sensory analysis indicated that no significant differences existed between the sorghum beer and both the control beer and a commercial malted barley beer with regard to aroma, mouth-feel, after-taste and clarity. However, the sorghum beer was found to be significantly different to both of the other beers with regard to colour, initial taste and foam stability.

“…Among the enzyme preparations used in this study, it was observed (Fig. 1a) that α-amylase was the principal enzyme of starch liquefaction during mashing 1,7,12 . Figures 1b, 1c and 1d show that the actions of β-amylase, filtrase and protease on starch liquefaction were only noticeable in the presence of α-amylase.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…The addition of enzymes to increase fermentable sugars and free amino acids, and to facilitate filtration when mashing with poorly malted or unmalted cereals, is an established practice in beer brewing 1,2,6,7,10,12,15 . One of the most important technological parameters to which brewers pay attention during mashing is the ease with which the mash filters 8,10,17,19,20 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling and Optimizing of Mashing Enzymes - Effect on Yield of Filtrate of Unmalted Sorghum by Use of Response Surface Methodology

Desobgo

Nso

Tenin

et al. 2010

J. Inst. Brew. 116(1), 62-69, 2010The effect of commercial enzymes on liquefaction of starch from unmalted sorghum was studied. The effects which these enzymes had on rates of filtration were evaluated. Models were developed, validated and optimized to establish the actions of enzymes, either alone or in combination. Preliminary studies on the sorghum cultivars Safrari, Madjeru and S.35 showed that α-amylase was the backbone enzyme for starch liquefaction among the enzymes used (α-amylase, Filtrase, protease and β-amylase). Models confirmed this observation as α-amylase individually in its first order (X 1 ) contributed 25, 11 and 17%, and in its sum of first and second orders (X 1 +X 1 2 ) contributed a 29, 31 and 36% yield of filtrate for Safrari, Madjeru and S.35 respectively. The ease of starch liquefaction, assessed by summing the first and second orders of individual intervention of all enzymes, was found to be in the order of Madjeru, S.35 and Safrari (79, 70 and 56% of yield of filtrate respectively). The importance of the enzyme combination in starch liquefaction in Safrari, S.35 and Madjeru was shown to be 44, 30 and 21% respectively. Enzyme combinations giving maximal starch liquefaction, as identified from a Doehlert experimental matrix, displayed a similar yield of filtrate (Safrari: 85 mL, Madjeru: 84 mL and S.35: 81 mL) after filtration of a 130 mL mash during 1 h. Validation of t he models revealed the model developed for Madjeru was the most reliable (R 2 = 0.994), while those developed for Safrari (R 2 = 0.987) and S.35 (R 2 = 0.976) were slightly less reliable. Model optimization gave theoretical enzyme (Brewers Amyliq TS, Filtrase NLC, Brewers Protease and β-amylase) combinations of 25 mg, 5.68 mg, 100 mg and 67.