Any diastatic power in Sorghum Malt extract?

I just brewed a GF IPA on Tuesday, and I "mashed" gelatinized (boilded for about an hour) wild rice (~1.4 l lbs) and roasted buckwheat groats (~1.4 lbs) in with 3.3 lbs sorghum malt. My thought was "well this is supposed to be a good replacement for barley because of a similar protein and sugar profile, and its diastatic power. I brought it through a standardecoction mash schedule, and then went about my business breweing the stuff (also included 4 lbs tapioca malt and 1 lb buckwheat honey, and like 6oz of brown rice syrup). At about the time I was pitching the yeast, I noticed that the little tub that the Sorghum malt extract came said "non diastatic". Did I waste my time with the mashing? Am I going to end up with grainy or sweet beer?

I hopped it like a Maharaja IPA clone (double IPA), and I obviously have enough fermentables, so I'm sure it will turn out tasty and all, but did I waste a few hours?

Thanks for any input.

Disclaimer: I'm a noob at this too, but I've spent a long time reading "the literature" on brewing with GF grains, so take what I say with a grain of salt. That said: most sorghum extract sold commercially (well, ALL that I've encountered, save for the Bard's kit from Midwest) is made from the unmalted grain, presumably using some industrial extraction technique. I would doubt that any amylase would be left in the extract even if your package didn't say "non-diastatic". The fact that it also said "non-diastatic" almost certainly means that you didn't get any enzymatic boost from mashing with the sorghum. Since you either gelatinized or roasted the rest of your grains, and they were unmalted, you can be reasonably certain that they didn't contribute any enzymes, either, though depending on the temperature you roasted your buckwheat at, it may have contributed something.

So far the most sensible-seeming way to convert GF grains that I've seen involves infusing the ungelatinized grain at normal mash temperatures to extract some enzymes, then straining out the grains, cooking them in fresh water to gelatinize them, and then adding them back in to the water you extracted the enzymes into and mashing as normal.

However, even if you didn't get fermentables from your grains, they'll add flavor and body, which is important. And infusing like you did, at mash temperatures for an hour or so, will ensure that you got a lot of flavor and starch out of them without getting a lot of tannins like you might if you boiled them (I know boiling quinoa is supposed to be bad anyway, because of tannin extraction; not sure if that's a problem with wild rice or buckwheat, though). FWIW I always do an infusion-mash of my GF grains before the boil, for those reasons. Whether it's necessary or not, IDK, but I do it anyway. So don't feel bad.

No extract will give you any diastatic power at all
If you have a lot of unconverted starches in your worth it might help to add amalyse ensyme(due to low temps it might possibly end up werry dry)(mashing througout the fermentation)
or add the amalyse directly to the mash next time to give a mash type convertion

Not true. There are some barley extracts that have been developed to be diastatic. muntons has two it seems.

I was going to say the same, that I didn't think any extract would be diastatic.
But it remains the same that all the sorghum extracts so far (Briess and Bards) appear to be nondiastatic and have no converting power.

A person would need to use a malted grain or amalyse enzyme.

I'll be trying to sprout sorghum after April finishes and I have time.

Ok, thanks for your replies. I kind of figured that this would be the case. Hopefully I'll end up with a beer with nice body and some "maltiness" to balance out the hops and alcohol.

I don't think I'll end up using amalyse in this batch, but perhaps I'll actually plan on that in the future.

If I remember to, I'll give an update on how the beer turned out.

This beer actually turned out pretty well. By far the most clear GF beer I've made yet, likely because I racked it about 4 times (the first time I left about a gallon of the ~5.5 gallon batch in the primary, i think because of the goopy wild rice and buckwheat particles that remained in solution for a bit). Because of all of the racking, it bottle carbed pretty slow, but it's good to drink now. There is definately not too much sweetness, especially since I was going for a GF 2xIPA. Actually, a little bit more sweetness would be appropriate to balance the heavy hopping. I think "watering it down" to a regualar IPA or Pale ale might make it a little, and I might even consider adding some sparkling water at time of serving to make a more sessionable beer if I'm in the mood. I'm anticipate it mellowing out over the next couple of months.

Call it blasphemy, but I often do the same of watering down with some carbonated water at serving.