texture if np dough upon cooling off

[thezaman]

 peter, i think you are right the late addition of salt in Roberto's formula is probably related to keeping his yeast healthy, he uses a very small amount.

[Pete-zza]

Chau,

As you know, hydration can be a very tricky thing, with many aspects and facets. I tried to make this point a while back at Reply 3 at http://www.pizzamaking.com/forum/index.php/topic,12211.msg115225.html#msg115225. In that post, I also provided a link to an article that I incorporated in great part in Reply 9 at http://www.pizzamaking.com/forum/index.php/topic,8419.msg72940.html#msg72940. I think that that article is a good one for you to read because it describes the components of flour that are hydrated by water and how the hydration takes place. I think the hydration discussion also dovetails into the autolyse process quite well. To help complete the story a bit more, I would add the following excerpts from other articles referenced earlier that help explain what happens when salt and yeast are added to a dough and, in particular, how the salt affects the gluten structure and the performance of yeast:

The dough-strengthening effect of salt is attributed to its interaction with flour proteins. "Flour gluten protein has a net positive charge in a dough system at normal pH (about 6.0). These positive charges repel each other, preventing the protein chains from interacting. The result is a weaker dough and one that gives lower baked-loaf volume," Mr. Strouts said. "When low levels of salt are added to the dough system, the salt shields the charges, thereby allowing the protein chains to hydrate more slowly, interact and form bonds. This results in a stronger dough with improved loaf volume and more desirable quality characteristics.

and

During the fermentation step of breadmaking, salt has a stabilizing effect. When salt is omitted from the dough or not added in sufficient quantity, excessive yeast activity results in gassy, low-pH dough and baked products with open grain and poor texture.

"Salt inhibits the action of the yeast and decreases gas production. This effect appears to be the result of increased osmotic pressure and action of sodium and chloride ions on the yeast cell membrane," said Brian Strouts, head of research and technical services, AIB International, Manhattan, KS. "Adjusting the salt level in a dough gives the baker a tool to regulate the production rate of carbon dioxide gas and the other byproducts of fermentation. This is especially useful as bakery temperatures fluctuate during seasonal changes."

Ms. Kragt added, "With higher ambient temperatures in the summer, doughs can over-proof. Salt helps to control the yeast activity, which reduces this condition." (from http://www.pizzamaking.com/forum/index.php/topic,8764.msg75936.html#msg75936)

and  

Salt has a retarding effect on the activity of the yeast. The cell wall of yeast is semi-permeable, and by osmosis it absorbs oxygen and nutrients, as it gives off enzymes and other substances to the dough environment. Water is essential for these yeast activities. Salt by its nature is hygroscopic, that is, it attracts moisture. In the presence of salt, the yeast releases some of its water to the salt by osmosis, and this in turn slows the yeast's fermentation or reproductive activities. If there is an excess of salt in bread dough, the yeast is retarded to the point that there is a marked reduction in volume. If there is no salt, the yeast will ferment too quickly. In this sense, the salt aids the baker in controlling the pace of fermentation. Nevertheless, we should note that a careful usage of yeast, control of dough temperature, and the type, maturity, and amount of preferment used are better tools for fermentation control. Salt quantity, as we have noted, should stay within the 1.8 to 2% range. (from http://www.kingarthurflour.com/professional/salt.html).

For your next experiment, or a future experiment, I think you are on the right track to use long autolyse and fermentation times even though long autolyse times would be out of the ordinary. For example, Evelyne Slomon once suggested that home pizza makers use only a five-minute autolyse rest period (see Reply 489 at http://www.pizzamaking.com/forum/index.php/topic,576.msg30141.html#msg30141). Also, as I noted in Reply 15 at http://www.pizzamaking.com/forum/index.php/topic,3220.msg74624.html#msg74624, typical autolyse rest periods for basic bread doughs in Professor Calvel's book range from 13 to 30 minutes and that is for dough batch sizes of around 75 pounds. I am not sure that such short autolyse rest periods would make for a good test of the principles you want to test.

Another point to keep in mind is that if the fermentation period (at room temperature) is too long, there is increased risk of the protease enzymes taking apart the gluten structure and resulting in the release of some of the water from its bond. I did not see that effect in the two doughs you made.

About the only other suggestion I would make to the test I suggested during our recent exchange is to fully dissolve the salt in some of the formula water before adding the yeast (which can also be added directly to the dough/flour) so as to rule out or minimize any effects of salt on yeast performance.

Thank God you didn't use oil and sugar in the dough also .

Peter



 

[thezaman]

 after, the above suggestions i made a batch of dough Wednesday for thursday night. i under mixed the dough 6 minutes in a hobart. i put the salt in after the first minute. i let it bulk rise two hours then in ball form for 4 hours i put it away till Thursday.i planned on cooking at 9pm so i let the dough rise for three hours. 95 degrees and high humidity. the dough formed nicely and was easy to stretch. the cold pizza did not have that leathery chew. i still offered some resistance when eating but nothing different than the pizza at the restaurants i have tried.i think that mixing time is a key. less mixed dough will be easier to stretch so it is not overworked. it was 100 degrees thursday night and i was playing in my oven. this is after a 12 hour shift in my hot kitchen . i am really obsessed with this style of pizza. this picture was taken by my daughter who made most of the pies. she is trying to improve her skills so she can expand the mobil wood fired business.

[RobynB]

Those look great and sound even better!  Is the one in your hand an egg pizza, or ??

[norma427]

Larry,

Those pies sure do look beautiful! 

Norma

[wheelman]

looks like she's ready!
bill

[Jackie Tran]

Nice looking pies Larry! 

As a follow up to exchanges with Peter on hydration of dough, I wanted to post my results.  In this experiment I compared an effectively hydrated (EH) dough (ie extended autolyse with flour and water) against a straight mixed (SM) dough.

For this test, I used 100% HG flour with a 72% hydration, 10% starter, 2.3% salt.

For the EH dough, I premixed the water (minus 10 gm to dissolve salt in later) with the flour, covered and allow the mixture to sit for 6 hours).   After the 6 hour extended autolyse, I dissolved the salt in 10gm of water, and mixed the salt water 10% starter with the EH dough.   It took about 4 minutes of hand mixing to fully integrate both the salt solution and starter into the EH dough.  This EH dough was allowed to rest for 15m before kneading began.

For the SM dough, I dissolved the salt in all of the water, then stirred in the starter, and then quickly added the flour and handmixed to an even mixture.  The SM mixture was covered and allowed to rest for 25m before kneading began.

After their rest periods, both doughs received the same hand kneading regimen, along with rest periods, and any stretch and folds deamed necessary. 

Upon initial handling of the dough, I was surprise to find that both doughs felt very similar.  I was expecting the EH dough to be much more fluid or feel as if it had a higher hydration than the SM.  It was only marginally softer in feel. 

Upon balling the 2 doughs during the kneading process, I did note once again that the EH dough was stronger in that the dough was not breaking under pressure to the extent that the SM dough was.  See pic below. 

By the end of the kneading, resting, and folding, I did not that the SM dough did feel a bit tougher/drier/stronger/stiffer BUT that the gluten structure was still weaker than the EH dough.   I allowed both doughs to rest an additional 15m before doing the final balling.  In the proofing chamber both doughs looked identical.   Both doughs were allowed to proof ferment until they were baked around 5pm.

When I went to assess the doughs prior to baking, the EH dough indeed did show a higher rise/expansion when allowed to free rise without the assitance of side wall as would be the case if they were proofed in containers. 

When I went to open the doughs, the SM dough was more extensible and opened much easier showing it's weaker gluten matrix compared to the EH dough. 

Pic 1 shows the EF dough after 5m kneading, 15m rest, and 1min of folding.
Pic 2 shows the SM dough after the same treatment.  Notice the difference in gluten strength
Pic 3 both doughs balled and ready for proofing.

[Jackie Tran]

Pic 1 shows both doughs after an 8 hour proof.  Both have flattened out, but the EH dough looks slightly bigger.  Better gluten development = better gas retention.

Pic 1 SM dough to the left, EH dough to the right.
Pic 2 SM dough close up shot
Pic 3 EH dough close up shot

Conclusion - Extended autolyse / effective hydration aids in gluten development.  Note in this particular test using 100% HG flour and a 6H autolyse, the EH dough showed LESS extensibility compared to the SM dough. 

Chau

[scott123]

Chau, I don't think it will impact your finally product all that negatively, but generally speaking, I find it best to avoid taking doughs to the point where you see torn gluten like you see in the SM ball.

I fully subscribe to the Humpty Dumpty principle.  Once you've damaged gluten, it can't be put back together again. This is why I gravitate towards dough handling regimens where the gluten development, prior to baking, is on it's way up to it's peak, not past it.

[Jackie Tran]

Chau, I don't think it will impact your finally product all that negatively, but generally speaking, I find it best to avoid taking doughs to the point where you see torn gluten like you see in the SM ball.

I fully subscribe to the Humpty Dumpty principle.  Once you've damaged gluten, it can't be put back together again. This is why I gravitate towards dough handling regimens where the gluten development, prior to baking, is on it's way up to it's peak, not past it.

Scott, I am incline to agree with you in the sense that damaged gluten does indeed give a different end product however I'm not sure that it is all negative and that it can't be put together.

The picture you have circled is actually in mid process of gluten developing, meaning that it was taken only partway through the dough handling process.  It is the staight mix dough that flattened out at the end and showed more extensibility compared to the EH dough, which was subjected to the same kneading/handling process but demonstrated stronger gluten development.  So overall/generally speaking, there was a lack of gluten development in that dough.  It probably could have stand to be reballed again prior to baking to stregthen it a bit more.   

Something I have always wondered along the same line of thinking as you is when I watch dough mixed in my bosch or other mixers, it looks like it is torn, mixed together, retorn, over and over.   I have always wondered that when compared to slower mixers, does this same tearing take place?  If not, how does it affect the end product?

The only satisfactory and temporary conclusion I could come up with is to compare a machine mixed dough with a dough made with a tartine-like hand method where the dough is stretch and folded but not to the extent that you see in my picture, where the outer layer tears.   All things being equal, the end result is that machine mixed doughs tend to exhibit a tighter cell crumb structure.  This is even more evident when we compare 2 machine mixed doughs, one moderately mixed versus one that is over mixed.  The gluten becomes so damage but yet does get put back together, but only upto a point and then the dough falls apart.  The end product of a overmixed or overdamaged dough is a tight celled crumb, that is tough and overly chewy especially after the cool down.  All undesireable IMO. 

But in speaking about gluten development, we also need to consider the other variables that affect it, which again makes the whole process that much harder to understand and use to our advantage.

Chau

[thezaman]

 saturday i had to leave work early,so i asked an employee to mix  dough for my  sunday night Neapolitan night.well, something went way wrong and the dough took on a very funny texture and taste. i shut down the event after my first two complaints.the dough was very sticky and didn't rise much.the dough didn't set up at all ,kind of stuck to the floor of the oven.i tasted a pizza after a few complaints and the dough had a sweet and off taste to it.i suspect he added sugar vs salt. the only thing that it didn't do is brown any different. i am stumped.the employee is off till Wednesday.
 i changed to the caputo red this week,i thought this may have been the issue so i made a batch today,it seemed normal .the red must have a higher gluten level in that 59% hydration was a little dryer than with the blue.
 any thoughts?
   there are some amazing pizzas coming from this group. i want to get up to speed on the upn thread ,john you last set of upn pies look great!!

[scpizza]

Better gluten development = better gas retention

= worse extensibility.  So that's not a win.  After all I can make the gluten arbitrarily strong just from mixing.  I'm more interested in side effects of autolyse, handling, and additives that improve flavor, texture, or extensibility apart from changing gluten strength.

I think this experimentation is great.