Use of alpha-amylase

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Michaelinwa

Active Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2015
Messages
35
Reaction score
3
Seems like alpha-amylase is used quite a bit with GF, infusion mashing. Why is this? I'm going to use millet malt, and I would think that conversion would be pretty good if mashed in the high 150F range for 60-120 minutes.

I assume there is something about millet v.s. barley that makes the addition of AA useful?

Thanks for any input.

Mike
 
The problem isn't Alpha per se. The problem is that the starches in Millet gelatinize at higher temps than barley. Those temps are above where alpha denatures. That is why the mash procedures you see are so complicated and involve removing some of the mash liquid.
 
I see. Do we know the gelatinization temperature for the Grouse pale millet? It looks like the temperature varies by the type of millet, and for some types it's low.
 
I see. Do we know the gelatinization temperature for the Grouse pale millet? It looks like the temperature varies by the type of millet, and for some types it's low.

163F. Testing was done by Grouse. Millet is lower in alpha and beta amylase. That is why we add it. It also eliminates a lot of the work by simplifying mash steps.
 
The gelatinization thing is flat-out wrong. The starches in Grouse millet malt will gelatinize and convert at normal barley temperatures. I have mashed as low as 148°F with no loss in efficiency. I ****NEVER**** mash hotter than 158°F, so can we please stop perpetuating the myth that millet needs some kind of crazy decoction mash?

The amylase additions are to help speed up conversion and ensure proper attenuation. You can leave them out if you want but I think they help things along.
 
The gelatinization thing is flat-out wrong. The starches in Grouse millet malt will gelatinize and convert at normal barley temperatures. I have mashed as low as 148°F with no loss in efficiency. I ****NEVER**** mash hotter than 158°F, so can we please stop perpetuating the myth that millet needs some kind of crazy decoction mash?

The amylase additions are to help speed up conversion and ensure proper attenuation. You can leave them out if you want but I think they help things along.

Based on your posts from other threads, I can't say I agree. You seem to assume your potential is 30 points/lb. It isn't. It's around 36 - like all other grains. You are mashing for 2 hours and not getting anything close to max efficiency specifically because of the gelatinization issue. If you are happy with you beer, fantastic! There are a million ways to brew. If yours is working for you, great. In terms of the numbers though, you think you are getting 75% efficiency, but you are only really getting 75% * 30/36 = 62%. You aren't converting a big chunk of the available sugar with the single infusion method. You are getting some conversion, but as the Grouse testing indicates, you aren't going to max out without raising the temp.
 
sorry to bump this thread, but Billl, from what I can devise from reading here, one should mash in at and maintain 163 for a period of 10-30 mins to allow gelatinization of starches, then reduce to desired mash temp (148-158F) and THEN add enzymes to facilitate a sacc rest of between 60-120 mins? Is this correct usage of the enzymes and temp movements?
 
You can try that, but @163 you'll denature the naturally enzymes and be completely reliant on whatever you add back. That's what the complicated mash schedule is trying to get around. You let the natural enzymes convert as much as they can, remove some of the enzyme rich liquid, raise the main mash over 163, return the enzyme liquid and some extra enzymes to convert the rest of the available sugar.

However, as the prior poster pointed out..... that's a total PITA and you can make perfectly good beer with just a single infusion mash. You lose a little efficiency, but it's so much faster and easier. Unless you are someone who really is motivated by optimizing the numbers instead of the beer, I'd recommend just buying a couple extra lbs of grain and going with a single infusion. There are several people on here just running experiments to see what is possible and geeking out on the science aspect of it - myself included.
 
A commercial brewer I spoke to also indicated concerns with unwanted flavours at higher temperatures, preferring to sacrifice efficiency...There are always tradeoffs.
 
Back
Top