Using Honey

I think it is just a coincidence. In fact, honey can retard yeast metabolism. This is most likely attributable to what the bees were consuming while making the honey. It can be hit-or-miss because you generally don't know the source of the nectar when you buy honey. As I recall, there is a discussion about this in "Cookwise" That said, I believe that honey is primarily fructose which is a five carbon sugar and sucrose is a 6 carbon sugar. Fructose has fewer metabolic steps in the citric acid cycle. Whether this is relevant or significant, I can't say. I generally use sucrose, but if I have honey, and depending on what I am making, I may use it. I don't notice any difference except in flavor.

Feeding the yeast is an outdated custom. Modern active dry yeast needs only to be hydrated before being used(dissolved in a small portion of water). Instant yeast doesn't need to be hydrated first and is simply mixed dry with the dry ingredients. A couple of tablespoons of sugar added to yeast water could actually kill the yeast. Even in very old recipes, I've only seen very small amounts of sugar used. The method you are describing was actually used to test to see if the yeast was alive back in the days when yeast viability was an issue. Yeast dines on the sugars derived from the digestion of the starches in the dough. There is actually a special yeast that is formulated to be able to work in high sugar and rich dough situations. Janet

All really good points. For a comprehensive discussion on yeast, I would recommend the following:

Wow, so my better "effects" were probably due to using less honey, less sugar, not because honey is less complex. Good to know, Thanks.

Aaron

Actually, you don't need to use sugar or honey to feed the yeast. They can break down the starches in flour very nicely and feed on that. If a recipe calls for a small amount of sugar, "to feed the yeast", just leave it out. You probably won't notice the difference. (Unless you use a bread machine where timing is more critical.)

Sometimes it's hard to know why things change. Too much sugar can cause problems - sweet doughs like cinnamon rolls use about 4 to 5 times as much yeast as breads with little to no sugar.

Honey has another issue with regards to rising. Raw honey has enzymes in it that interfere with yeast. This is to be expected since the bees don't want the honey to ferment. If you use raw honey, according to Laurel Robertson who wrote, "Breads from Laurel's Kitchen", you need to briefly boil raw honey before using it in bread. This outrages the true believers in raw honey as boiling honey reduces some of the quality and food value of the honey. My thought is so little honey is used in a bread, that the difference is slight, while the difference in bread quality is not. If you're concerened about the quality of the honey, just put some raw honey on the bread.

When I make sweetened breads, I prefer to use honey rather than white sugar as honey ads more flavor.

Good luck, Mike

If the average whole-earth/birkenstock/hairshirt wearer knew what is used to keep a bee colony healthy, they'd stop eating it, let alone worry about the effects of boiling. Graham

Tell us more.

Mary

You're guessing on the right track. Different sugars do get metabolised at different rates, and to different products. I faintly remember from a high school chemistry lab that yeast handles dextrose better than anything else. We fermented a range of different sugars, then weighed the varying amounts of alcohol produced. There must be a website that gives an 'official' dataset, but I'm not sure how best to find it. A Google search on "yeast dextrose" isn't any use.

Maybe we need a biochemist to fill in the details.

Not all yeasts can break down starches. If you leave out the sugar, it may be necessary to do something else, like heavy kneading or adding an enzyme, to break the starches enough for the yeast to handle. It'll depend on what yeast blend is being used.

That's no doubt true, but it's also not relevant. All bakers yeasts and all sourdough cultures I've heard of can break down starches into sugars, thus it is not necessary to add sugars in normal bread making.

Mike

I think that this is part of the question, as your wording suggests. I too know of no bakers' blends that need sugar, but none of us has heard of everything. What yeasts do we find in which blends? Are there old baking practises that necessitate sugars or a bit of starch-breaking? To what extent can we use sugars to hurry the rising along or change its taste and texture?

I think that the need for starch-decomposition raises a lot of questions with practical consequences, as your wording suggests. I too know of no bakers' blends that need added sugars, but none of us has heard of everything, especially if baking in historical or geographically remote areas is to be considered.

One clear reason for not needing to add sugar is that flour already contains some. The dominant sugar in wheat flour is hexose. The yeast consumes that rather than the starch, and will slow down once the sugars have run out. This is the motive behind adding bread improver, which breaks down starches into sugars that the yeast will act on more quickly.

Are there perhaps old baking practises that necessitate sugars or a bit of starch-breaking? To what extent can we use sugars to control the rate of rising or change its taste and texture? The original poster noted that honey - predominantly levulose and dextrose - made the yeast act faster, for example. That is explained by dextrose being easier for yeast to metabolise.

What are the benefits of bread improver instead of extra sugars?

May a low-sugar flour composition perhaps explain why pizza dough was traditionally risen overnight, while today only a few hours will suffice?