Failed Experiment | The Fresh Loaf

Experimentation can be fun and we can learn a lot from them. Experiments don't always succeed but that's how we learn what works and what doesn't.

It is well known in baking that salt counteracts yeast activity. This inspired a bright idea. I made a sourdough loaf as I usually do, using a one-hour autolyze, which was allowed to proof for six hours at 86 degrees F. My idea was to omit the salt during proofing and add it at the very end, mixing it into the proofed dough. I had visions of a huge rise and an open crumb. That was the plan.

After a six-hour proof I added the normal amount of salt and kneaded it in, expecting a dough ball with good gluten development and surface tension.

No such luck.

I kneaded and kneaded and kneaded some more with my trusty Hobart-era KA and its spiral dough hook. The machine was getting warm and a dough ball wasn't forming. I tried adding spoonful after spoonful of flour to no avail. I tried letting it rest. All I had was a shapeless, gooey, sticky mess with no surface tension. I removed the dough with my fingers and it stuck to everything. I was scraping dough off of the surfaces it was sticking to -- the mixer bowl, the spatula, my fingers. Clearly the gluten development was gone and it was beyond salvation. It had overproofed. This gooey, sticky, shaggy blob was impossible to shape. Nevertheless I went though the motions, slashed it and baked it anyway. It turned out just fair -- a good rise but a dense crumb. It was heavy and dense, not very digestible.

The next day I made another loaf using the exact same everything -- the same ingredients in the same proportions, only this time I added the salt immediately after the one-hour autolyze period, immediately before the starter was added. Again the dough proofed for 6 hours at 86 F. At the end of the proofing period I poked the dough with my finger. I could tell there were gas bubbles inside. On came the KA with the spiral dough hook. Round and round it went. After a few minutes at speed 1 the dough came together into a textbook dough ball. The gluten was well developed and the surface tension was good. The outer surface was smooth and not sticky.

The second loaf had a great rise and great oven spring. So much for the concern that salt might inhibit the action of yeast. I was aware that salt also inhibited proteolysis, the degradation of gluten, and this experiment really drove the point home.

Between these two experiments I re-watched videos by Julia Child and chef Michael Montgomery, showing how to make yeasted baguettes. They don't autolyze per se but add the salt early in the process when they are mixing their dry ingredients. Chef Montgomery cautions against letting the yeast come in contact with the salt, but there is salt in the dough from the beginning.

Sometimes experiments have a happy ending.

Not at all. It was rather illuminating! Thanks for sharing.

Thanks for the feedback. I'm glad someone got something out of it.

Because the gluten is developing well, I may try a bit higher hydration to make the dough a bit softer.

thanks Mixinator, this was really interesting and seems to me to confirm the gluten tightening action of salt in dough. Hamelman's Bread (p.44) and McGee on Food & Cooking (p.535) both discuss the need for, and function of, salt in dough. Basically, it helps slow the fermentation so you don't have a runaway dough that becomes a mega-starter instead. It also helps tighten the gluten network, so the loaf has better structure and volume. Your experience brings this all home and is a useful demonstration, I learn more from others' descriptions than from simply reading the theory behind it... Science in action, for sure.

A starter is flour and water. Bread is flour and water. Isn't bread just a starter in bigger quantities? If we make a starter active by feeding it in order to make bread and bread is just the same thing then why can't we just go straight into making the dough as that would be effectively feeding it?

And I quote from your comment... "Basically, it helps slow the fermentation so you don't have a runaway dough that becomes a mega-starter instead".

But feel free to explain in depth.

Yes, in one sense, putting some starter into a large quantity of flour and water (i.e. the main dough of a recipe) is like giving it a massive feed. If left long enough the whole mass will become innoculated and be one big starter. To make a loaf though we don't want that. We want a combination of things all of which happen in different time frames. We want: - gluten to form, a result of mixing the flour and water (takes time) - gluten structure to be developed, a result of our kneading of the dough (takes time) - CO2 to be produced, the result of yeasts (wild or otherwise) feeding on the natural sugars in the flour (takes time) We don't want: - the yeasts to feed into the gluten structure we have developed and thus deteriorate it (over proofing) - the yeasts to consume too much of the sugars so that there are none left to provide a nice caramelised crust Baking a loaf of bread is about balancing these things and to do that we have to control the rate of fermentation. We want to be baking the loaf when there is a great gluten structure and when the yeast has been going long enough to provide enough CO2 for a great rise. The quantities of yeast we start off with will affect the time it takes for enough CO2 to be produced. Use a lot of yeast, you only need a little time, use a tiny amount of yeast and the process can take many hours. The temperature we apply also affects things. Warmer temperatures speed up the yeast activity, cooler temperatures slow it down. The longer time these processes go on, the more flavour is typically generated in the bread, hence most artisan bakers go for long fermentations (so use either less yeast or use refridgeration or both). If you were to simply mix a bunch of flour and water and leave it hoping that eventually the wild yeasts in there would grow and multiply and days/weeks later provide you with a nice dough to bake with then I think you'd be disappointed. In the time it took for the yeasts to develop to enough quantity the dough would either dry out and go hard or go mouldy depending on the hydration level.

It's amazing what goes into a loaf of bread. And to think what went into developing and discovering all this. Thanks for the explanation ElPanadero.

I was going to answer but EP said it all and much better than I could. It's all about the balance of yeast, salt, water, flour, time and temp. What makes bread so much fun is the interplay of art and science, can't imagine ever being bored with it! Abe, I'm having fun reading your experiment (and Mini's)!

You write, "So much for the concern that salt might inhibit the action of yeast."

Is there any doubt about this?

My first thought was that your dough overproofed because the yeast ran unchecked due to the lack of salt. Ad the salt, inhibit the yeast action a bit, and get good bread.

Obviously you don't want to overly inhibit the yeast action, which could result, for instance, if you mixed the salt with your starter where the salt would be in concentrated contact with the yeast.

You write, "So much for the concern that salt might inhibit the action of yeast."
Is there any doubt about this?

Withholding the salt during the proofing stage didn't improve anything. I got just as good a rise with salt as without.

Since I don't see people recommending to withhold salt during the proofing stage, I would not think doing so would improve anything. Salt inhibits yeast action, and too much salt kills yeast.

You want yeast action inhibited somewhat. If you don't inhibit your yeast, you get the faster rise, large irregular holes, etc.

Since I don't see people recommending to withhold salt during the proofing stage, I would not think doing so would improve anything. Salt inhibits yeast action, and too much salt kills yeast.

Conducting an experiment was the way to find out.

You want yeast action inhibited somewhat. If you don't inhibit your yeast, you get the faster rise, large irregular holes, etc.

Salt also inhibits proteolysis, the degradation of gluten and the result of overproofing.

So let me see if I've understood this properly...

We have many things working here to make a loaf of bread. The yeast, gluten, taste, crumb... Etc.

If we take a dormant starter and put it into the final recipe the yeasts will feed and make it rise but the timing for everything to come together at the right time will be off and will result in poor quality bread.

By feeding the starter, and making it active, before we use it in the recipe we can control what's going on and get the timing exact to produce a great loaf.

The things that contribute to the making of the loaf are: the ingredients, the hydration, the leavening agent and it's health and type, the time, the temperature, the mixing, kneading, bulk fermenting, proofing, shaping, scoring and baking. Probably many more things besides. The things we tend to judge a finished loaf by are: the oven spring, the colour, the shape, the texture, the crumb, the taste and so on. I note you are now talking about a "dormant starter" being added to a final dough recipe whereas previously (I thought) you were talking about just mixing a final dough recipe (with no added starter or leavening agent) and leaving it long enough for yeasts to develop enough to make a loaf. (like creating a large starter from scratch). These two things are different. Adding a dormant starter will vastly speed up the process of yeasts multiplying and producing the CO2 needed to raise a loaf. The reason is because a dormant starter already has a high population of yeasts in it. So if the starter has been in the fridge for ages it will still revive pretty quickly once fed and brought to the optimal temperature. Normally we revive such starters with a couple of separate feedings before baking with it but I would think you could put one in a dough mix, use warm water, keep everything warm throughout and perhaps with a longer bulk ferment time still arrive at a decent loaf. Such things can be hit amd miss though and really we don't want to be wasting good flour with the misses. By preparing your starter before baking by giving it feedings and ensuring it rises and peaks within a few hours you can be sure that it is highly populated and able to innoculate the larger dough mass in the kind of time you want it to. In doing so you are only risking a small amount of flour in those feedings to see if the starter is ready or not rather than using an entire dough mix.

So let me see if I've understood this properly...

We have many things working here to make a loaf of bread. The yeast, gluten, taste, crumb... Etc.

By feeding the starter, and making it active, before we use it in the recipe we can control what's going on and get the timing exact to produce a great loaf.