Trends in Food Science & Technology 65 (2017) 1e9

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Trends in Food Science & Technology

journal homepage: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/trends-in-food-science-
and-technology

Alternatives to malt in brewing

Paulina Bogdan, Edyta Kordialik-Bogacka*
Institute of Fermentation Technology and Microbiology, Faculty of Biotechnology and Food Sciences, Lodz University of Technology, 171/173 Wolczanska
Street, 90-924 Lodz, Poland

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Background: Due to the competitiveness of the beer market, breweries are under pressure to lower the
Received 11 March 2016 cost of beer production. They have also attempted to widen their offers by developing new, innovative
Received in revised form products to meet consumer demand. To achieve these goals, they have increasingly replaced malt with
16 January 2017
various less expensive adjuncts. It is estimated that up to 85e90% of beer worldwide is now produced
Accepted 2 May 2017
Available online 8 May 2017
with adjuncts.
Scope and approach: The use of adjuncts may cause negative as well as positive changes to the quality of
the nal product. It is therefore important to understand the impact of particular adjuncts on the
Keywords:
Beer
different properties of beer in order to ensure appropriate use. In this review, both the positive and
Adjunct negative consequences are discussed of the partial replacement of malt with other carbohydrate sources
Unmalted grain during beer production.
Barley Key ndings and conclusions: Novel analytical methods and research developments have shed new light
Corn on the impact of adjuncts on beer characteristics. Appropriately chosen adjuncts can contribute to lighter
Syrup colours, improved colloidal or foam stability and prolongation of beer shelf-life. The avour prole can
also be changed by altering the sugar and amino acid spectra in wort. However, negative consequences
may also result from the use of adjuncts. With appropriate processing and the application of commercial
enzymatic preparations during wort and beer production these threats can be minimized.
2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction European countries, between 10 and 30% of malt is replaced by

Beer is one of the oldest known beverages in the world, and is
still a staple low-alcohol product. The world beer market is
extremely competitive, and has become more so in recent years e
as Europe, North America and Japan have witnessed a decrease in
beer sales, partially associated with the expansion in these markets
of lager beer. In response, many breweries have attempted to widen
their offers by developing new, innovative products to meet con-
sumer demand (Carvalho et al., 2009; Hager, Taylor, Waters, &
Arendt, 2014; Harasym & Podeszwa, 2015; Yeo & Liu, 2014). They
have also come under pressure to produce consistently high quality
beer at lower cost. As a result, brewers have increasingly replaced
malt with various less expensive adjuncts.
Up to 85e90% of beer in the world is now produced with ad-
juncts (Annemller & Manger, 2013, pp. 1e80). However, there are
wide variations in the use of adjuncts on different continents. In
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: edyta.kordialik-bogacka@p.lodz.pl (E. Kordialik-Bogacka).
unmalted materials, in the United States and Australia 40e50% or
more, while in Africa the gure stands at between 50 and 75%
(Annemller & Manger, 2013, pp. 1e80). Climatic conditions are not
favourable to barley crops in Africa (Taylor, Dlamini, & Kruger,
2013). The substitution of barley malt with unmalted grains culti-
vated domestically is a way to limit the need to base beer pro-
duction on expensively imported barley malt, so reducing the cost
of raw materials (Goode & Arendt, 2006). These grains are most
often used unmalted, since climatic conditions in Africa are not
very suitable for malting either (Agu & Palmer, 2013; Holmes,
Cahill, Smart, & Cook, 2013; Uvere, Ngoddy, & Nwankwo, 2014).
On other continents too, the use of unmalted grains reduces the
need to process poor quality malt, which may be affected by
adverse weather conditions in particular years, and can even
mitigate shortages of malt on the world market (Goode, Wijngaard,
& Arendt, 2005). Indigenous cereals are usually used as adjuncts,
supporting local agriculture. Sorghum is the most common adjunct
in Africa, rice in Asia, corn in America. In Europe, barley and corn
are the most often used adjuncts (Annemller & Manger, 2013, pp.
1e80; Zhu, Ma, Li, & Li, 2015).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2017.05.001
0924-2244/ 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 P. Bogdan, E. Kordialik-Bogacka / Trends in Food Science & Technology 65 (2017) 1e9
The inclusion of even a little unmalted raw material in the grist
can alter the sensory properties of beer. Thus, it is possible to obtain
a product of new avour and aroma without having to change the
production line (Kordialik-Bogacka, Bogdan, & Diowksz, 2014;
Piddocke, Kreisz, Heldt-Hansen, Nilsen, & Olsson, 2009; Yeo &
Liu, 2014). It is estimated that a 30% substitution of malt with
unmalted corn allows for an 8% reduction in the cost of beer pro-
duction (Poreda, Czarnik, Zdaniewicz, Jakubowski, & Antkiewicz,
2014). The addition of sugar syrups or granulated sugar, mean-
while, provides a simple way to increase wort gravity. High-gravity
fermentation is more cost-effective and is now common practice in
the brewing industry (Piddocke et al., 2011). The use of adjunct can
also inuence the price of the nal product due to tax regulations,
such as in Japan where liquor tax is calculated according to malt
usage (Braun & Dishman, 2006; Goode & Arendt, 2006). In Ger-
many, Switzerland and Greece, where the German Purity Law
(Reinheitsgebot) is applicable, beer can only be produced from
malt, water, hops and yeast and other sources of starch and sugar
are prohibited. Nevertheless, it is nowadays possible to produce
beer by taking even raw barley as the only source of extract
(Aastrup, 2010; Heldt-Hansen, Elvig, Scho nenberg, & Kreisz, 2011;
Steiner, Auer, Becker, & Gastl, 2012). Supplementation of the
mashes with exogenous enzymatic preparations is necessary to
break down the starch, proteins and cell wall components in the
grains (Steiner et al., 2012).
The aim of this review is to discuss both the positive and
negative consequences of the partial replacement of malt with
other carbohydrate sources during beer production.
2. Malt substitutes
The denition of an adjunct has changed over the years.
Currently, adjuncts are described as sources of extract other than
malt (Atnafu & Abebaw, 2015; Briggs, Boulton, Brookes, & Stevens,
2004, pp. 34e200). Adjuncts can be divided according to their state
of matter, into solids and liquids. The rst group comprises
unmalted cereals such as barley, corn, rice and (of lesser impor-
tance) wheat, oats, sorghum, rye, and triticale, together with
unmalted pseudocereals (buckwheat, amaranth, quinoa), cassava,
teff and granulated sugar (sucrose) (Annemller & Manger, 2013,
pp. 1e80; Goode & Arendt, 2006). All except for granulated sugar
require being hydrolized in the mashing process with malt or
exogenous microbial enzymes. For this reason, they are called mash
vessel adjuncts. Liquid adjuncts include sucrose-based syrups,
derived from sugar cane or sugar beet, and hydrolyzed starch
syrups (wort extenders), as well as malt extracts and syrups ob-
tained from hydrolyzed cereals (wort replacements). Apart from
carbohydrates, the latter contain nitrogenous compounds and
minerals and their composition is similar to that of brewing wort.
Malt extracts, supplied as hopped and unhopped, are popular
among home brewers and micro-breweries. Liquid adjuncts and
granulated sugar contain soluble sugars and can be added to boiling
nished wort. They are therefore called copper or kettle adjuncts.
These are commonly used to produce high-gravity worts, which
serve to increase the capacity of the brewhouse and as a result the
production capacity of the whole brewery. Their application also
enables wort fermentability to be adjusted easily (Piddocke et al.,
2009; Piddocke et al., 2011). Sucrose is used both in solid and
liquid forms, as dissacharide or invert sugar after hydrolysis (a
mixture of glucose and fructose). Nevertheless, concentrated so-
lutions of sugar tend to crystallize, which requires warm handling
and storage, at 40e50  C (Briggs et al., 2004, pp. 34e200).
Iodine-negative starch hydrolysates from corn, wheat or rice are
produced off-line by enzymatic and/or acid hydrolysis and can have
a similar sugar composition to malt worts. These are prepared from
the endosperm of grains following the separation of germs and
bran (Annemller & Manger, 2013, pp. 1e80; Szwed, Tomaszewska-
Ciosk, & Blazewicz, 2014). A wide variety of syrups may also be
used, with different compositions of fermentable (glucose, maltose,
maltotriose) and non-fermentable (maltotetraose and higher oli-
gosaccharides) sugars, depending on the degree of starch hydro-
lysis they have undergone. Syrups are often categorized according
to their dextrose equivalent value (DE value), which corresponds to
the percentage content of reducing sugars, calculated as glucose
(although this does not provide a full picture of the sugar spectrum
in the syrup and consequently of the fermentability of the sup-
plemented wort) (Stewart, 2006). Maltose-rich syrups are prefer-
able to glucose-rich syrups. In worts abundant in glucose, yeasts
have difculty adapting to metabolize maltose and maltotriose,
which slows or halts fermentation. Nowadays, starch-derived
syrups are widely used by large-scale breweries (Piddocke et al.,
2009). Syrups allow to increase the strength of wort with no
additional investment in the brewery. Moreover, these adjuncts
enable to overcome problems with heterogeneity of raw grains, by
ensuring the consistent composition of the wort and beer. They also
reduce the space required to store cereal raw materials. Use of
syrups or sugar can provide savings in terms of energy and mate-
rials. When syrups or sugar are used, the mash can be thinner,
making extraction and separation of the wort from raw materials
easier. Due to the lower amounts of sludge in pitching wort, there is
also reduced soiling of yeast cells during fermentation.
Mash vessel adjuncts include products which are: (1) not pre-
cooked but can be directly mixed with grist, such as wheat ours,
(2) pre-cooked outside the brewery, such as aked maize or rice
grits, micronized and torreed whole grains, aked wheat or
barley, and aked pearl barley, (3) require cooking in the brewery
during mashing, such as rice, maize or sorghum grits and ours or
rened starches from these materials (Meussdoerffer & Zarnkow,
2009). This division is associated with the different gelatinization
temperatures of starches derived from various sources. In the case
of adjunct starch (for example rice starch) which gelatinizes at
temperatures higher than those at which malt enzymes are active,
prior starch gelatinization is necessary before the adjunct can be
mixed with the malt mash (Glatthar, Heinisch, & Senn, 2005;
Goode et al., 2005; Meussdoerffer & Zarnkow, 2009; Poreda et al.,
2014). This requires a cereal cooker, an additional vessel in the
brewhouse, if infusion mashing is performed. When cooking grits
(in particular rice), it is preferable to use exogenous a-amylase or a
portion of highly enzymatic, ground malt. Gelatinization of raw
cereals can also take place in the mash vessel before the intro-
duction of the malt grits with water. Nevertheless, this procedure
prolongs wort production (Krottenthaler, Back, & Zarnkow, 2009;
Meussdoerffer & Zarnkow, 2009).
The use of rice is now mostly limited to Asian countries, due to
its high price. Broken grains, a by-product of rice grown for human
consumption, are used. Before further processing, de-husking and
degerming are required (Stewart, 2006). A mixture of different
varieties is usually delivered, which results in considerable uctu-
ation in terms of starch gelatinization temperature and the dura-
tion of wort separation. Rice is considered to give beer a neutral,
dry, light and clean avour (Pliansrithong, Usansa, & Wanapu,
2013). A fuller avoured beer is obtained with corn. Before corn
can be processed into grits or akes for brewing purposes, the oil-
rich germs have to be removed (Annemller & Manger, 2013, pp.
1e80; Meussdoerffer & Zarnkow, 2009; Yeo & Liu, 2014). When a
brewery uses a lauter tun, there cannot be excessive amounts of
rice or corn in the grist, because the rice used is de-husked and corn
grits do not contain husks, which serve as a lter layer during
lautering (Meussdoerffer & Zarnkow, 2009). In the case of wheat,
which is rich in pentosans which increase viscosity, coarse grinding
 P. Bogdan, E. Kordialik-Bogacka / Trends in Food Science & Technology 65 (2017) 1e9
is recommended to alleviate wort ltration problems (Faltermaier,
Waters, Becker, Arendt, & Gastl, 2014).
It is worth highlighting that when raw barley is used as an
adjunct, its quality specication is different from that of barley used
for malting. The viability of the grains (germination energy and
capacity) is unimportant, but the protein content must be high.
Raw barley is tough and therefore wet milling systems are rec-
ommended for grinding. The processing of unmalted barley often
requires the supplementing of mash with exogenous hemi-
cellulases, owing to the high concentration of hemicelluloses and
gums in grains (10.3% d. m.) (Annemller & Manger, 2013, pp.
1e80). The hemicellulose contents of corn and rice are 4.2% d. m.
and 2.3% d. m., respectively (Annemller & Manger, 2013, pp.
1e80). In barley malt, the cell walls, which are mainly composed of
hemicelluloses, are degraded during malting. Pre-cooked adjuncts
are easily handled and provide higher extract yields than raw
materials, due to the fact they contain gelatinized starch and partly
degraded hemicelluloses. It is very easy to process aked rice or
maize and yield high extracts, even in infusion mashes. However, it
is not currently economical to use these particular adjuncts
(Krottenthaler et al., 2009).
Wheat our can be used directly in infusion mashes. To obtain a
higher extract, however, the our can be pre-soaked or pre-cooked,
usually at 96  C to avoid frothing (Briggs et al., 2004, pp. 34e200).
This also ensures the gelatinization of its small starch granules.
Wheat our is obtained almost completely from endosperm. The
germ and bran are removed, which results an increase in the starch
content and a decrease in the protein, ash and fat contents, with as
a consequence a higher extract yield (Stewart, 2006). Dealing with
our can be difcult, requiring specialized equipment, such as
special hoppers and conveyers (Briggs et al., 2004, pp. 34e200).
As has been already mentioned, the chemical composition of
particular adjuncts varies, which has an impact on beer quality. It is
essential to understand these relations in order to adjust the pro-
duction process, for example by selecting appropriate enzymatic
preparations or the optimal mashing programme (Faltermaier et al.,
2014; Glatthar et al., 2005; Malomo, Ogunmoyela, Oluwajoba, &
Adekoyeni, 2012).
The proportion of mash vessel adjuncts in the grist depends on
many factors, including the type and quality of the adjunct, the
pretreatment method, the use of enzymatic preparations, the
quality of the malt, the mashing procedure and the wort separation
system. When large quantities of cereal adjuncts are used, it is
recommended to employ mash lters to reduce wort separation
time. Without use of enzyme preparations during mashing, the
proportion of corn or rice grits in the grist should not exceed
30e40%. Levels of malt substitution above 40% require the appli-
cation of a-amylase (Annemller & Manger, 2013, pp. 1e80; Cooper,
Evans, Yousif, Metz, & Koutoulis, 2016). However, with such grist
mixtures separation of wort in the lauter tun can be difcult.
Good sorghum processability can be achieved only with the use
of exogenous enzymes (Schnitzenbaumer, Karl, & Arendt, 2013).
Brewing with up to 50% wholegrain sorghum our is feasible even
with infusion mashing, but the use of sorghum grain requires pre-
gelatinization of its starch by cooking (Schnitzenbaumer, Kaspar,
Titze, & Arendt, 2014). Even with the use of commercial enzyme
mixtures, separation of wort in the lauter tun is impossible with
over 25% sorghum (Annemller & Manger, 2013, pp. 1e80).
For processing of barley adjuncts in quantities of less than
10e20%, the enzyme activity of barley malt is sufcient. Larger
quantities of barley adjuncts require use of microbial b-glucanase to
avoid lautering and ltration problems (Annemller & Manger,
2013, pp. 1e80; Goode & Arendt, 2006). At levels of adjunct over
25%, exogenous proteinase is additionally required, and at levels
above 50% other enzymes, including a-amylase are needed
3
(Annemller & Manger, 2013, pp. 1e80). Nevertheless, it has been
reported that brewing with up to 50% barley adjuncts and enzymes
can produce beer with good attenuation and avour stability (Kunz,
Mller, Mato-Gonzales, & Methner, 2012).
Processing oats used in quantities of up to 20% enables pro-
duction of good quality wort, without the need for exogenous en-
zymes (Schnitzenbaumer & Arendt, 2014). It is even feasible to
produce acceptable beers with up to 40% oats and without exoge-
nous enzymes, but on condition that the oats are hammer-milled
(Schnitzenbaumer, Kerpes, Titze, Jacob, & Arendt, 2012). However,
the replacement of 20e40% barley malt with hammer-milled oats
increases the b-glucan content of the mash and decreases the
ltration/lautering rate signicantly (Schnitzenbaumer & Arendt,
2013; Schnitzenbaumer et al., 2012).
3. Wort extract
During malting, enzymes responsible for the degradation of
insoluble high-molecular weight components in the grains to sol-
uble low-molecular compounds are synthesized and activated.
Adjuncts lack predominantly or wholly hydrolytic enzymes.
Moreover, their structures are compact, rather than modied (as in
malt), which hinders enzyme action (Hbner, O'Neil, Cashman, &
Arendt, 2010; Schnitzenbaumer & Arendt, 2013; Steiner et al.,
2012). The application of mash vessel adjuncts usually leads to
decreased extract content in wort. Lower levels of malt in the grist
generates a smaller pool of enzymes involved in the hydrolysis of
malt components such as starch or proteins and the components of
cell walls (Donkelaar, Noordman, Boom, & Goot, 2015; Kordialik-
Bogacka et al., 2014). However, in good quality malt there is a
slight excess of enzymes, which can also degrade compounds
introduced through the addition of adjuncts (Ryder & Power, 2006).
When larger amounts of malt are substituted, the use of exogenous
enzymatic preparations becomes necessary. Starch gelatinization
performed at higher temperatures than with typical mash also
contributes to the breakdown of starch by amylolytic enzymes. The
use of either wheat, oats or raw barley in amounts over 20% without
the application of exogenous enzymes causes a decrease in the
extract content of wort and consequently lowers the nal alcohol
content in beer (Depraetere, Delvaux, Coghe, & Delvaux, 2004;
Kordialik-Bogacka et al., 2014; Lowe, Ulmer, Van Sinderen, &
Arendt, 2004; Schnitzenbaumer & Arendt, 2014). Enzymatic prep-
arations can counteract this problem. By virtue of high starch
content in corn (73%) and rice (75%), in contrast, their addition
results in a higher level of extract in worts as well as higher
attenuation (Annemller & Manger, 2013, pp. 1e80; Poreda et al.,
2014).
Wort is a complex medium which ensures effective yeast
growth. It is mostly composed of carbohydrates (approximately
90% of wort solids) and nitrogenous compounds (approximately 5%
of wort solids), inorganic ions, phosphates, lipids, organic acids,
polyphenols, vitamins, nucleic acid derivatives. Maltose (43e45%)
is the most abundant sugar in all-malt wort, followed by malto-
triose (11e13%), monosaccharides (7e9%) and sucrose (3e4%)
(Lodolo, Kock, Axcell, & Brooks, 2008). Non-fermentable carbohy-
drates are also present in wort, including dextrins (20e30% of the
carbohydrate fraction), arabinose, xylose, ribose, isomaltose, pan-
ose and isopanose (Kunz, Seewald, Brandt, & Methner, 2013;
Palmer, 2006). As chemoorganotrophic organisms, yeasts require
an organic source of carbon. Glucose, fructose, sucrose, maltose,
maltotriose, galactose and rafnose (a bottom-fermenting yeast)
are metabolized by brewing yeast. There is a strict order of sugar
uptake (Lodolo et al., 2008; Rautio & Londesborough, 2003;
Stewart, Hill, & Russel, 2013). The most readily utilized are taken
up rst. Assimilation begins with sucrose, followed by glucose and
4 P. Bogdan, E. Kordialik-Bogacka / Trends in Food Science & Technology 65 (2017) 1e9
fructose and then by maltose and trisaccharide maltotriose
(Espinoza-Ramrez, Perez-Carrillo, & Serna-Saldvar, 2014; Gibson
et al., 2008; Lodolo et al., 2008). Sucrose, glucose and fructose are
known as primary fermentable sugars. Brewing yeasts switch to
metabolizing other sugars once primary fermentable sugars have
been largely consumed (Stewart et al., 2013). Maltose uptake re-
quires the synthesis in yeast cells of maltose permease, which
transports the maltose intact across the cellular membrane using
energy generated from ATP hydrolysis, and a-glucosidase, which
splits maltose to two glucose residues (Russell, 2006). Maltotriose
is also assimilated intact by independent permease and then
hydrolysed by a-glucosidase. In contrast to sucrose, glucose and
fructose, energy (ATP conversion to ADP) is required for active
maltose and maltoriose uptake. Maltotriose is not assimilated by
yeast cells until approximately 50% of maltose has been depleted
(Gibson et al., 2008; Lodolo et al., 2008).
The shift in the sugar composition of wort which results from
the introduction of adjuncts can have a signicant inuence on
yeast growth and fermentation performance (Gibson, 2011). Thus, a
high concentration of sucrose or glucose in wort, as a consequence
of the application of either glucose or sucrose syrups to wort or
granulated sugar to obtain high gravity wort, can retard or even
suppress maltose and maltotriose utilization during fermentation
(Gibson, Lawrence, Leclaire, Powell, & Smart, 2007; Piddocke et al.,
2011). This is particularly important when stored yeasts are pitched
into wort, since only yeasts harvested immediately after the main
fermentation and inoculated into new wort are suitable for
metabolizing maltose and maltotriose (Gibson, 2011). Moreover,
increased wort gravity poses a threat to fermentation performance.
It is associated both with elevated osmotic pressure and the dilu-
tion of essential nutrients such as amino acids, minerals, fatty acids
and vitamins (Gibson, 2011; Stewart et al., 2013). A deterioration of
yeast viability, growth and fermentation performance has been
observed in highly concentrated media by D'Amore (1992) and
Cahill, Murray, Walsh, and Donnelly (2000). Studies by Piddocke
et al. (2009) also conrm that increased gravity of wort caused by
the addition of glucose or maltose syrups causes decrease in yeast
growth rate, elongation of the lag phase which precedes the syn-
thesis of ethanol, incomplete sugar uptake and increased concen-
trations of ethyl acetate and isoamyl acetate in beer. Moreover,
when the fermentation performance of worts supplemented with
glucose and maltose syrups were compared, maltose-enriched
wort was found to provide a higher yeast cell growth rate,
improved wort fermentability and superior beer avour (Piddocke
et al., 2009). It was also shown that the viability of yeast grown in
maltose medium was higher than that in glucose medium (Stewart,
2006). This explains why maltose syrups are preferred for high-
gravity brewing.
4. Nitrogenous compounds and their inuence on yeast
growth and beer avour
Malt replacements, whether mash vessel or kettle adjuncts,
decrease the content of nitrogen-containing substances, including
both high molecular compounds and nitrogen sources for brewing
yeast (Depraetere et al., 2004; Glatthar et al., 2005; Kunz et al.,
2012; Poreda et al., 2014; Schnitzenbaumer & Arendt, 2013;
Steiner et al., 2012; Yano, Hideki, Imai, Ogawa, & Ohochi, 2008).
Due to the limited extracellular proteolytic activity of yeast, only
amino acids, ammonium ions and some di- and tripeptides are
assimilable. Free amino nitrogen (FAN) is utilized for the synthesis
of enzymatic and structural proteins, which are necessary for yeast
growth and other metabolic reactions. An adequate level of FAN is
necessary for efcient yeast multiplication and good fermentation
performance (Lekkas, Hill, Taidi, Hodgson, & Stewart, 2009;
Pliansrithong et al., 2013). Amino acids, like sugars, are utilized
sequentially (Lodolo et al., 2008; Stewart et al., 2013). According to
the order of their uptake, they are classied into four groups.
Arginine, asparagine, aspartate, glutamate, glutamine, lysine, serine
and threonine (group A) are taken up as rst, followed by histidine,
isoleucine, leucine, methionine and valine (group B). Alanine,
glycine, phenylalanine, tyrosine, tryptophan (group C) and
ammonia are only utilized following the depletion of group A
amino acids (Lekkas, Stewart, Hill, Taidi, & Hodgson, 2005, 2007;
Tenge, 2009). Proline alone represents group D. Despite being
present in large quantities in wort, proline can be only assimilated
by brewing yeast during fermentation under nitrogen-limited
conditions (Gibson, 2011; Lodolo et al., 2008).
The application of adjunct may change the proportion of the
different amino acids in wort. In a study by Aastrup (2010), the
complete replacement of malt by unmalted barley lead to a 15%
increase in quickly absorbed amino acids and a decrease ranging
from 8% to 28e30% in non-adsorbed amino acid (proline). This
phenomenon was also observed by Heldt-Hansen et al. (2011).
Therefore, they recommended a distinct level of FAN in worts
produced completely from unmalted barley (9e14 mg/L/Plato) and
in all-malt worts (10e18 mg/L/Plato) to achieve comparable
fermentation performance. When available nitrogen sources are
limited in wort produced with adjunct, the uptake of specic amino
acids by yeast proceeds in a different way from that in all-malt wort
and the degree of FAN utilisation is higher.
Amino-acids limitation in wort may stimulate the utilization of
peptides. Yeast growth is deteriorated in media containing di-
peptides in comparison with media in which amino acids or
ammonium sulphate are the sole nitrogen sources. Up to 400
different dipeptides and 8000 tripeptides are believed to be present
in all-malt wort (Lekkas, Stewart, Hill, Taidi, & Hodgson, 2007).
Such complexity makes understanding how these compounds are
utilized more difcult. It is also believed that low-molecular-weight
peptides have a negative inuence on foam stability (Lekkas et al.,
2009).
The lower FAN level obtained with the addition of raw cereals
results from the negligible activity of enzymes which degrade high-
molecular-weight proteins, often rendering them insoluble in the
wort from which they are separated during ltration with other
insoluble materials. Moreover, some cereals, such as corn and rice,
are not as protein-rich as raw barley and consequently barley malt.
Syrups and granulated sugar, meanwhile, do not introduce any
nutrients, such as nitrogenous compounds, other than carbohy-
drates (Stewart, 2006). The nitrogen limitation observed in worts
obtained with the addition of adjuncts, in particular in high gravity
worts, can lead to poor yeast viability and retarded or sluggish
fermentation (Piddocke et al., 2009; Yano, Hideki, et al., 2008).
Nevertheless, adjuncts can also change the composition of nitrog-
enous compounds in worts signicantly, determining for example
which amino acids or peptides become predominant (Yano, Hideki,
et al., 2008). It should be noted that due to adjunct use the con-
centration of other nutrients, such as inorganic ions or vitamins, is
also altered, which has a further impact on yeast growth (Stewart
et al., 2013).
The concentration and proportion of individual assimilable ni-
trogen sources also has a profound inuence on the production of
higher alcohols, esters, vicinal diketones (diacetyl, 2,3-
pentanedione) and H2S (Lodolo et al., 2008). Excess FAN in wort
leads to increased synthesis of higher alcohols (e.g. iso-butanol) in
beer, which are formed from intermediates in amino acid catabolic
pathways (valine in this case) (Gibson, 2011). In turn, higher alco-
hols are precursors of the most important esters. Therefore, the FAN
content has to be high enough to guarantee adequate yeast growth
but not so high that it stimulates the formation of excessive
 P. Bogdan, E. Kordialik-Bogacka / Trends in Food Science & Technology 65 (2017) 1e9
amounts of fermentation by-products, mainly higher alcohols
(Pires, Teixeira, Branyik, & Vicente, 2014). The concentration of
certain individual amino acids in wort can also have an impact on
beer avour. It is thought that higher valine concentrations in wort
and consequently a higher valine uptake and intracellular con-
centration in yeast cells causes less diacetyl to be produced during
fermentation (Bra nyik, Vicente, Dosta lek, & Teixeira, 2008;
Krogerus & Gibson, 2013; Shen, Wang, Liu, Li, & Li, 2014). Diace-
tyl gives a butter aroma associated with the avour of immature
beer.
Changes in the composition and quantity of amino acids that
result from the use of adjuncts can thus alter the avour of beer.
This is mainly related to the formation of higher alcohols, rst, and
then esters, in different amounts than in all-malt beer (Kordialik-
Bogacka et al., 2014). The lower concentrations of amino acids
and small peptides in worts produced with adjuncts can give beers
a much more delicate taste. The structure and quantity of carbo-
hydrate can also have an inuence on beer avour. High-gravity
brewing is associated with disproportionately high concentra-
tions of esters, mainly ethyl acetate and isoamyl acetate (Bra nyik
et al., 2008; Piddocke et al., 2009). Acetate esters, including ethyl
acetate and isoamyl acetate, are the predominant esters in beer.
Ethyl acetate imparts a fruity avour and isoamyl acetate a banana
avour. Excessive concentrations of these esters is considered to
have a negative inuence on the avour of beer (Pires et al., 2014;
Rossi, Sileoni, Perrettib, & Marconi, 2013). During the fermentation
of wort supplemented with glucose syrups, higher amounts of ac-
etate esters are produced than with all-malt wort or wort supple-
mented with maltose syrups, even in the case of similar FAN levels
(Piddocke et al., 2009). The reason for this is not fully understood. It
may be connected with inhibition by maltose of the transport of
volatile compounds from yeast cells or with the formation of lower
amounts of acetyl-CoA during metabolism of maltose (Briggs et al.,
2004, pp. 34e200). Thus, due to the limited availability of acetyl-
CoA, which is a substrate in ester production, smaller amounts of
esters are produced. For worts at normal gravity (12e14  P) sup-
plementation with liquid adjuncts also leads to higher ester content
in beer (Piddocke et al., 2009).
Low molecular nitrogenous compounds, in particular amino
acids and low molecular peptides, also have an impact on beer
colour, as they take part in Maillard and Strecker reactions
(Vanderhaegen et al., 2003). Maillard compounds include hetero-
cyclic compounds, which are formed in complex and differential
reactions between reducing sugars and proteins, peptides, amino
acids and amines. Excessively high concentrations of Maillard
compounds lead to darkening, as well as to premature ageing and
the appearance of a bready, stale avour (Saison, Schutter,
Uyttenhove, Delvaux, & Delvaux, 2009). Therefore, a lower con-
centration of low molecular nitrogenous compounds, as a result of
adjunct application, can limit the formation of compounds which
deteriorate beer aroma, taste and colour. In studies by Kunz et al.
(2012), barley malt in the grist was replaced with raw barley in
proportions from 10 to 90%. It was observed that as the amount of
unmalted barley in the grist was increased, the oxidative stability of
beer improved owing to the lower content of specic intermediate
Maillard reaction products, which accelerate radical generation.
Moreover, lower amounts of specic oxidative indicators (2-
methyl- and 3-methyl-butanal) were synthesized during beer
storage. Studies by Steiner et al. (2012) showed an almost twofold
reduction in the formation of aging compounds in beer produced
completely with unmalted barley in comparison with all-malt beer.
Decreased FAN content also means a smaller pool of precursors for
Strecker aldehydes, which are generated during beer aging (Bra nyik
et al., 2008). Adjuncts result in not only lower FAN levels in wort in
comparison to malt but also generate fewer Maillard reaction
5
products and Strecker aldehydes which form during malt kilning
(Palmer, 2006).
5. Dimethyl sulphide (DMS)
Dimethyl sulphide at high concentrations gives beer the unde-
sirable avour of cooked sweetcorn. Barley malt is said to be the
main source of S-methylmethionine (SMM), which is a DMS pre-
cursor (Gresser, 2009). Thus, a lower proportion of malt in the grist
can decrease DMS content in wort. On the other hand, DMS pre-
cursors are also present in adjuncts such as unmalted cereals
(Russell, 2006). It has been shown that the precursors of DMS in
corn, for example, can be completely converted to DMS during wort
boiling. Moreover, it should be remembered that cereals which
contain starch with high gelatinization temperatures, should be
gelatinized in a cereal cooker before being mixed into the mash.
This step accelerates the breakdown of DMS precursors and the
subsequent evaporation of DMS (Poreda et al., 2014). Thus, the
replacement of malt by an adjunct can alter the DMS concentration
in beer.
6. Polyphenols, avour and colloidal stability
Polyphenols are secondary metabolites of plants, which contain
at least one aromatic ring linked to the hydroxyl group or other
structural elements. Polyphenols can be divided into four cate-
gories, according to the type and number of their phenolic residues:
phenolic acids, avonoids, stilbenes and lignans (Aaron &
Shellhammer, 2010). In beer, 70e80% of polyphenols are derived
from barley malt and the rest from hops (Callemien & Collin, 2008;
Jerkovic, Nguyen, Timmermans, & Collin, 2008). The substitution of
malt by adjuncts usually leads to decreased polyphenol content,
and not only in the case of liquid adjuncts, which are composed
mainly of sugars and devoid of polyphenols. In research by
Depraetere et al. (2004), the use of 40% unmalted wheat in the grist
caused an up to twofold decrease in the polyphenol content of beer.
In studies by Kunz, Woest, Lee, Mller, and Methner (2011),
decreased polyphenol content in the nal product was further
observed with the use of raw barley, although only with a high
proportion of barley (75 or 90%). For example, in beer produced
with 75% barley, the polyphenol content was 143 mg/l, versus
157 mg/l for all-malt beer. A similar trend was observed with the
use of unmalted barley by Yano et al. (2008). These authors found
only a small difference between the polyphenol content in all-malt
wort and wort obtained with barley.
Polyphenols have been widely reported to be strong antioxi-
dants (Fumi, Galli, Lambri, Donadini, & De Faveri, 2011; Leitao et al.,
2012). However, there is disagreement regarding the role of poly-
phenols as antioxidants in wort and beer. Polyphenols constitute
numerous molecules with different structures and act through
various mechanisms. Polyphenols with low molecular weight are
generally considered to have antioxidant capacity. As their molec-
ular weight increases, their activity decreases (Krottenthaler, 2009).
Polyphenols may function as free radical scavengers, reducing
agents, singlet oxygen quenchers and chelators of divalent transi-
tion metals such as iron and copper. Polyphenols can release
electrons to free radical species easily, generating phenoxy radicals,
which are relatively stable (Vanderhaegen, Neven, Verachtert, &
Derdelinckx, 2006). On the other hand, they may also act as pro-
oxidants, by transferring electrons to transition metal ions. They
can reduce Fe (III) to Fe (II) and Cu (II) to Cu (I), metals which are
prone to oxidation via Fenton and Haber-Weiss reactions. Flavan-3-
ols, proanthocyanidins and avonols may potentially promote the
formation of radical oxygen species (Aaron & Shellhammer, 2010;
Vanderhaegen et al., 2006).
6 P. Bogdan, E. Kordialik-Bogacka / Trends in Food Science & Technology 65 (2017) 1e9
Polyphenols also have an inuence on beer avour. Polyphenols
in the avonoid family provide beer with astringency and impact
the overall aroma of hops. Therefore, the level of these compounds
in beer can affect both avour and avour stability (Aaron &
Shellhammer, 2010).
High molecular polyphenols play a role in haze formation.
During the brewing process, polyphenols should bind haze-active
proline-rich proteins into stable complexes, which precipitate and
can be removed (Iimure et al., 2009; Robinson et al., 2007). How-
ever, without proper treatment colloidal haze can form in beer
through the formation of protein-polyphenol complexes during
beer storage (Rehmanji, Gopal, & Mola, 2005). Chill (non-perma-
nent) haze disappears after warming but during further storage
strong bonds can be formed between condensed polyphenols,
called tannoids, and proteins, leading to irreversible haze
(Dienstbier, Gabriel, Sladk, & Sigler, 2011; Steiner, Becker, & Gastl,
2010). Thus, there are two ways in which adjuncts can affect
colloidal stability. They can contribute to lowering both the amount
of haze-active proteins, due to decreased proteolytic activity
(Donkelaar et al., 2015; Ferrari, Baronchelli, Stanca, & Gianinetti,
2010; Gupta, Abu-Ghannam, & Gallagher, 2010; Steiner et al.,
2012), and polyphenols in beer (Kunz et al., 2011; Yano et al., 2008).
This usually results in improved beer colloidal stability. Studies by
Depraetere et al. (2004) show that the substitution of malt with 40%
wheat decreases the risk of permanent haze formation more
effectively than a 20% substitution. The application of rice gives a
similar effect. The use of syrups, which are devoid of polyphenols
and proteins, can also improve the colloidal stability of beer
(Meussdoerffer & Zarnkow, 2009; Yano et al., 2008).
7. b-glucan
During malting, enzymes are synthesized and activated which
degrade the components of cell walls (including b-glucan and
arabinoxylans). Due to the lack of these enzymes, undegraded b-
glucan is present in unmalted cereals and higher amounts of b-
glucan are released into the wort than when malt only is used. In
particular, greater quantities of b-glucan can be extracted if nely
ground grains are used for mashing (Lu & Li, 2006; Lu, Li, & Gu,
2005). b-glucan can cause production problems in breweries such
as viscous wort, slow wort separation, low extract recovery, slow
beer ltration, the risk of haze, and the need for large quantities of
lter-aids (Steiner et al., 2010; Tgel, Runyon, Galindo, & Nilsson,
2015). These effects were conrmed by Glatthar et al. (2005);
Kordialik-Bogacka et al. (2014); Kunz et al. (2011) and
Schnitzenbaumer and Arendt (2014) in processes involving barley,
triticale or oats. To minimize the undesirable impact of b-glucan, it
is necessary to use malt with high b-glucanase activity or apply
either microbial b-glucanase or cellulase to the mash
(Schnitzenbaumer & Arendt, 2013). Corn, wheat and rice, which
have much lower levels of b-glucan than barley malt, should not
increase wort and beer viscosity (Blazewicz & Zembold-Gula, 2007;
Lyu, Nam, Lee, & Lee, 2013; Meussdoerffer & Zarnkow, 2009). In
mashes made with wheat, rye or triticale, pentosans may more
commonly give rise to production problems (Glatthar et al., 2005).
The use of syrups, which do not contain either b-glucans or arabi-
noxylans, does not cause such problems and even may reduce
difculties arising from the processing of under-modied or inho-
mogeneous malts (Yano et al., 2008). On the other hand, b-glucan
can contribute positively to palate-fullness.
8. pH
Adjuncts usually have an inuence on mash and wort pH due to
their reduced buffering capacity. The pH value of the mash is an
important determinant of enzymatic activity and as a result for
extract recovery. It is recommended to acidify adjunct mashes to a
pH value of around 5.4e5.5. This results in higher attenuation,
reduced viscosity and better lautering. It also helps to maintain
acceptable levels of colouring during boiling and enhances the
activity of phosphatases, thereby increasing the buffering capacity
of the wort. Further acidication of the boiling wort is desirable
before casting, since it is benecial for the precipitation of unstable
proteins and gives a pleasant bitterness to the beer without
harming the bitterness yield. Lower buffering capacity results in
larger decreases in pH during fermentation, and as a consequence
provides green beer with a lower pH value. Low pH favours the
breakdown of a-acetolactate, known as potential diacetyl, into
free diacetyl, which is then reduced by yeast to acetoin and 2,3-
butanediol. The degradation of diacetyl below its avour threshold
is a prerequisite for beer maturation. Lower pH values can therefore
shorten the maturation time needed for diacetyl reduction.
With regard to the inuence of particular adjuncts on pH wort,
the literature concerning raw barley is equivocal. Introduction of
unmalted barley has been reported to result in worts with both
higher and lower pHs (Annemller & Manger, 2013, pp. 1e80; Lowe
et al., 2004). Use of oats or sorghum increases the pH of wort
(Kordialik-Bogacka et al., 2014; Schnitzenbaumer & Arendt, 2013,
2014; Schnitzenbaumer et al., 2013; Schnitzenbaumer et al., 2012).
9. Foam stability
Beer foam stability is mainly dependent on the interaction of
proteins/polypeptides originating from malt and iso-a-acids from
hops (Bamforth, 2004; Blasco, Vin ~ as, & Villa, 2011). High molecular
weight proteins/polypeptides, including protein Z, lipid transfer
protein 1 (LTP1), hordeins and barley dimeric a-amylase inhibitor-1
(BDAI-1) have all been demonstrated to be effective at stabilizing
beer foam (Iimure et al., 2009; Kordialik-Bogacka & Ambroziak,
2007; Kordialik-Bogacka & Antczak, 2011). However, hydrophobic
polypeptides have been shown to be the key foam-positive com-
pounds and the balance between polypeptides derived from albu-
mins and hordeins to play a decisive role (Bamforth & Milani,
2004). Malt is a source not only of foam-promoting proteins, but
also of other foam-positive and foam-negative components, such as
b-glucan, melanoidins, polyphenols and lipids (Bravi, Benedetti,
Marconi, & Perretti, 2014). The precise role of b-glucan, melanoi-
dins, polyphenols in stabilizing foam is a matter of long running
debate (Combe, Ang, & Bamforth, 2013; Evans et al., 2011; Gresser,
2009).
If unmalted cereals are used to replace malt in the grist, the
chemical composition of the wort and beer is altered, including the
content of proteins/polypeptides and lipids, which are of utmost
importance for foam stability (Annemller & Manger, 2013, pp.
1e80). Unmalted cereals contain proteins that are not degraded
during malting, and wort may therefore contain high-molecular-
weight proteins/polypeptides, which may have a positive effect
on beer foam stability (Depraetere et al., 2004; Steiner et al., 2012).
It has been shown that the more barley grains are modied during
malting (i.e. the higher the Kolbach index) the lower is beer foam
stability (Evans & Bamforth, 2008). Nevertheless, research has not
been conclusive concerning the impact of particular adjuncts on
foam stability. It has been claimed for instance that despite the
similar protein contents in wheat and barley, wheat contributes a
greater amount of high-molecular-weight proteins to wort.
Depraetere et al. (2004) demonstrated that wheat possesses foam-
active compounds and can improve the foam stability of beer
produced from over-modied malt, but when wheat grist was
mixed with malt with high foaming potential beer foam stability
deteriorated.
 P. Bogdan, E. Kordialik-Bogacka / Trends in Food Science & Technology 65 (2017) 1e9
Others have indicated that b-glucans and arabinoxylans from
wheat may reduce the drainage of liquid from foam by increasing
the viscosity of beer and consequently increase foam stability
(Depraetere et al., 2004). Yano et al. (2008) found that substituting
malt with 20 or 40% raw barley improved foam stability by up to
20%. This may be associated with the greater amount of high-
molecular-proteins in wort produced with unmalted barley. These
authors also found the use of syrups to be detrimental for foam
stability, but only when used in quantities above 25%. This may be
surprising, if one takes into account the fact that syrups do not
contribute any positive compounds from the point of view of foam
stability. However, they also do not contain foam-damaging com-
ponents such as lipids, diluting their levels in the nal product.
Moreover, as Bamforth (2004) shows, in all-malt beer there can be
between twice and three times more foam-promoting compounds
than are necessary to generate stable foam. To sum up, the foam
stability of beer produced with the addition of small quantities of
adjuncts should not deteriorate. However, higher quantities of ad-
juncts, in particular with low protein content such as corn or rice,
can have a negative impact on the foam stability of the nal
product. The lipid content in the adjunct is no less important. The
use of raw materials rich in lipids, such as corn, requires prior
removal of the grain layers in which the lipids are located
(Meussdoerffer & Zarnkow, 2009).
10. Conclusions
Using adjuncts can reduce processing costs, since adjuncts yield
less expensive extract than malt. Adjuncts can also help save energy
and water, by removing the need for kilning, germination and
steeping processes. As a consequence, the carbon footprint of beer
production may be diminished. The use of liquid adjuncts or sugar
allows the strength of wort and beer to be increased, with no
additional investment in the brewery. Use of liquid adjuncts or
sugar can also shorten the length of the brewing process. These
adjuncts further allow certain problems with using raw grains, such
as heterogeneity, to be overcome, by ensuring the consistent
composition of the wort and beer. They also reduce the space
required to store cereal raw materials. Use of copper adjuncts can
provide savings in terms of energy and materials. When copper
adjuncts are used, the mash can be thinner, making extraction and
separation of the wort from raw materials easier. Due to the lower
amounts of sludge in pitching wort, there is also reduced soiling of
yeast cells during fermentation.
The use of adjuncts can furthermore be benecial for the
properties of beer. Brewing with adjuncts usually produces beers
with improved colloidal stability. This is attributable to their lower
protein content, in particular when copper adjuncts or grains
sparse in proteins, such as corn or rice, are used. Colloidal stability is
further enhanced by the reductions in polyphenol content which
occur when barley malt is replaced with copper adjuncts (which do
not contain polyphenols) or with grain adjuncts (which contain
lower levels of extractable polyphenols). The substitution of malt
with adjuncts, moreover, makes beer lighter, which in most cases is
favourable. A benecial decrease in avour staling precursors in
beer is another result of adjunct use, due to lower nitrogen levels.
Finally, by altering the sugar and amino acid spectra which result
from the use of unmalted raw materials, changes can be made to
the avour proles of beers. This gives brewers the ability to
develop nal products with new sensory characteristics.
On the other hand, low levels of soluble proteins can result in
less full-bodied beer and lower head retention. The absence of
husks in many adjuncts can be another problem, limiting their use
if the wort is to be separated in the lauter tun. Some raw grains
introduce high molecular, non-fermentable carbohydrates that
7
render processing more difcult. A risk when using mash vessel
adjuncts is that there may be insufcient quantities of enzymes
from the malt to perform saccharication of starch or to degrade
gums and hemicellulose, causing ltration problems. There may
also be insufcient quantities of enzymes to break down proteins
and ensure an appropriate level of FAN in wort, and of foam-
positive polypeptides in beer. One of the most signicant disad-
vantages of using adjunct is, in fact, the low content of assimilable
nitrogenous compounds available for the yeast. This can have a
negative inuence on beer fermentation. Most problems connected
with the ineffective breakdown of polymers from raw grains can be
overcome, however, by the application of exogenous enzymes.
References
Aaron, P. M., & Shellhammer, T. H. (2010). A discussion of polyphenols in beer
physical and avour stability. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 116, 369e380.
Aastrup, S. (2010). Beer from 100% barley. Scandinavian Brewers Review, 67, 28e33.
Agu, R. C., & Palmer, G. H. (2013). Evaluation of the potentials of millet, sorghum and
barley with similar nitrogen contents malted at their optimum germination
temperatures for use in brewing. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 119,
258e264.
Annemller, G., & Manger, H.-J. (2013). Processing of various adjuncts in beer pro-
duction (1st ed.). Berlin: VLB.
Atnafu, T., & Abebaw, G. (2015). Partial substitution of barley malt by effective use of
selected secondary starch crops in brewing technology by Saccharomyces cer-
evisiae with a case example of Dashen brewery. American Journal of Food Science
and Technology, 3, 24e26.
Bamforth, C. W. (2004). The relative signicance of physics and chemistry for beer
foam excellence: Theory and practice. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 110,
259e266.
Bamforth, C. W., & Milani, C. (2004). The foaming of mixtures of albumin and
hordein protein hydrolysates in model systems. Journal of the Science of Food
and Agriculture, 84, 1001e1004.
Blasco, L., Vin~ as, M., & Villa, T. G. (2011). Proteins inuencing foam formation in
wine and beer: The role of yeast. International Microbiology, 14, 61e71.
Blazewicz, J., & Zembold-Gula, A. (2007). Milled corn products in worts production.
Polish Journal of Food And Nutrition Sciences, 57, 41e44.
Br
anyik, T., Vicente, A. A., Dosta lek, P., & Teixeira, J. A. (2008). A review of avour
formation in continuous beer fermentations. Journal of the Institute of Brewing,
114, 3e13.
Braun, J., & Dishman, D. H. (2006). Microbrewing. In F. G. Priest, & G. G. Stewart
(Eds.), Handbook of brewing (2nd ed., pp. 777e814). New York: Taylor & Francis
Group.
Bravi, E., Benedetti, P., Marconi, O., & Perretti, G. (2014). Determination of free fatty
acids in beer wort. Food Chemistry, 151, 374e378.
Briggs, D. E., Boulton, C. A., Brookes, P. A., & Stevens, R. (2004). Brewing. Science and
practice. Abington: Woodhead Publishing Limited.
Cahill, G., Murray, D. M., Walsh, P. K., & Donnelly, D. (2000). Effect of the concen-
tration of propagation wort on yeast cell volume and fermentation perfor-
mance. Journal of American Society of Brewing Chemistry, 58, 14e20.
Callemien, D., & Collin, S. (2008). Use of RP-HPLC-ESI(-)-MS/MS to differentiate
various proanthocyanidin isomers in lager beer extracts. Journal of American
Society of Brewing Chemistry, 66, 109e115.
Carvalho, G. B. M., Silva, D. P., Bento, C. V., Vincente, A. A., Teixeira, J. A.,
Felipe, M. G. A., et al. (2009). Banana as adjunct in beer production: Applica-
bility and performance of fermentative parameters. Applied Biochemistry and
Biotechnology, 155, 53e62.
Combe, A. L., Ang, J. K., & Bamforth, C. W. (2013). Positive and negative impacts of
specialty malts on beer foam: A comparison of various cereal products for their
foaming properties. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 93,
2094e2101.
Cooper, C. M., Evans, D. E., Yousif, A., Metz, N., & Koutoulis, A. (2016). Comparison of
the impact on the performance of small-scale mashing with different pro-
portions of unmalted barley, Ondea Pro, malt and rice. Journal of the Institute of
Brewing, 122, 218e227.
Depraetere, S., Delvaux, F., Coghe, S., & Delvaux, F. (2004). Wheat variety and barley
malt properties: Inuence on haze intensity and foam stability of wheat beer.
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 110, 200e206.
Dienstbier, M., Gabriel, P., Sladk, P., & Sigler, K. (2011). Prediction of colloidal sta-
bility of highly stabilized beers by a modied Chapon tannoid content test.
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 117, 329e334.
Donkelaar, L. H. G., Noordman, T. R., Boom, R. M., & Goot, A. J. (2015). Pearling barley
to alter the composition of the raw material before brewing. Journal of Food
Engineering, 150, 44e49.
D'Amore, T. (1992). Improving yeast fermentation performance. Journal of the
Institute of Brewing, 98, 375e382.
Espinoza-Ramrez, J., Perez-Carrillo, P., & Serna-Saldvar, S. O. (2014). Maltose and
glucose utilization during fermentation of barley and sorghum lager beers as
affected by b-amylase or amyloglucosidase addition. Journal of Cereal Science,
8 P. Bogdan, E. Kordialik-Bogacka / Trends in Food Science & Technology 65 (2017) 1e9
60, 602e609.
Evans, D. E., & Bamforth, C. W. (2008). Beer foam: Achieving a suitable head. In
C. W. Bamforth, I. Russell, & G. G. Stewart (Eds.), Beer. A quality perspective (pp.
1e66). San Diego: Academic Press Inc.
Evans, D. E., Finn, J. A. C., Robinson, R. H., Eglinton, J. K., Sheehy, M., & Steward, D. C.
(2011). The effects of hop-a-acids and proline-specic endoprotease (PSEP)
treatments on the foam quality of beer. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 117,
335e342.
Faltermaier, A., Waters, D., Becker, T., Arendt, E., & Gastl, M. (2014). Common wheat
(Triticum aestivum L.) and its use as a brewing cereal e a review. Journal of the
Institute of Brewing, 120, 1e15.
Ferrari, B., Baronchelli, M., Stanca, A. M., & Gianinetti, A. (2010). Constitutive dif-
ferences between steely and mealy barley samples associated with endosperm
modication. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 90, 2105e2113.
Fumi, M. D., Galli, R., Lambri, M., Donadini, G., & De Faveri, D. M. (2011). Effect of
full-scale brewing process on polyphenols in Italian all-malt and maize adjunct
lager beers. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 24, 568e573.
Gibson, B. R. (2011). 125th anniversary review: Improvement of higher gravity
brewery fermentation via wort enrichment and supplementation. Journal of the
Institute of Brewing, 117, 268e284.
Gibson, B. R., Boulton, C. A., Box, W. G., Graham, N. S., Lawrence, S. J., Linforth, R. S. T.,
et al. (2008). Carbohydrate utilization and the lager yeast transcriptome during
brewery fermentation. Yeast, 25, 549e562.
Gibson, B. R., Lawrence, S. J., Leclaire, J. P. R., Powell, C. D., & Smart, K. A. (2007).
Yeast responses to stresses associated with industrial brewery handling. FEMS
Microbiology Reviews, 31, 535e569.
Glatthar, J., Heinisch, J. J., & Senn, T. (2005). Unmalted triticale cultivars as brewing
adjuncts: Effects of enzyme activities and composition on beer wort quality.
Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 85, 647e654.
Goode, D. L., & Arendt, E. K. (2006). Developments in the supply of adjunct materials
for brewing. In C. W. Bamforth (Ed.), Brewing. New technologies (pp. 30e57).
Abington: Woodhead Publishing Limited.
Goode, D. L., Wijngaard, H. H., & Arendt, E. K. (2005). Mashing with unmalted
barley-impact of malted barley and commercial enzyme (Bacillus spp.) addi-
tions. Master Brewers Association of Americas, 3, 184e198.
Gresser, A. (2009). Properties and quality. In A. S. Esslinger (Ed.), Handbook in
brewing (pp. 386e387). Freiberg: Wiley- VCH.
Gupta, M., Abu-Ghannam, N., & Gallagher, E. (2010). Barley for brewing: Charac-
teristic changes during malting, brewing and applications of its by-products.
Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 9, 318e328.
Hager, A.-S., Taylor, J. P., Waters, D. M., & Arendt, E. K. (2014). Gluten free beer. A
review. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 36, 44e54.
Harasym, J., & Podeszwa, T. (2015). Towards sustainable de-growth - medical survey
data as predictors for estimation of niche market value - gluten-free beer
market case. Journal of Cleaner Production, 7, 1e7.
Heldt-Hansen, H. P., Elvig, N., Scho nenberg, S., & Kreisz, S. (2011). Barley specica-
tions for brewing technology based on unmalted barley. Glasgow: Proceedings
EBC Congress.
Holmes, C. P., Cahill, G., Smart, K. A., & Cook, D. J. (2013). The composition and ul-
trastructure of sorghum spent grains. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 119,
41e47.
Hbner, F., O'Neil, T., Cashman, K. D., & Arendt, E. K. (2010). The inuence of
germination conditions on b-glucan dietary bre and phytate during the
germination of oat and barley. European Food Research and Technology, 231,
27e35.
Iimure, T., Nankaku, N., Watanabe-Sugimoto, M., Hirota, N. T. Z., Kihara, M.,
Hayashi, K., et al. (2009). Identication of novel haze-active beer proteins by
proteome analysis. Journal of Cereal Science, 49, 141e147.
Jerkovic, V., Nguyen, F., Timmermans, A., & Collin, S. (2008). Comparison of pro-
cedures for resveratrol analysis in beer: Assessment of stilbenoids stability
through wort fermentation and beer aging. Journal of the Institute of Brewing,
114, 143e149.
Kordialik-Bogacka, E., & Ambroziak, W. (2007). The relationship between poly-
peptides and foaming during fermentation. LWT e Food Science and Technology,
40, 368e373.
Kordialik-Bogacka, E., & Antczak, N. (2011). Prediction of beer foam stability from
malt components. Czech Journal of Food Sciences, 29, 243e249.
Kordialik-Bogacka, E., Bogdan, P., & Diowksz, A. (2014). Malted and unmalted oats in
brewing. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 130, 390e398.
Krogerus, K., & Gibson, B. R. (2013). Diacetyl and its control during brewery
fermentation. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 119, 86e97.
Krottenthaler, M. (2009). Hops. In A. S. Esslinger (Ed.), Handbook in brewing (pp.
85e97). Freiberg: Wiley-VCH.
Krottenthaler, M., Back, W., & Zarnkow, M. (2009). Wort production. In
A. S. Esslinger (Ed.), Handbook in brewing (pp. 165e176). Freiberg: Wiley-VCH.
Kunz, T., Mller, C., Mato-Gonzales, D., & Methner, F. J. (2012). The inuence of
unmalted barley on the oxidative stability of wort and beer. Journal of the
Institute of Brewing, 118, 32e39.
Kunz, T., Seewald, T., Brandt, N., & Methner, F. J. (2013). Reducing properties of
fermentable and nonfermentable carbohydrates in beverages and brewing
process. Journal of American Society of Brewing Chemistry, 71, 124e130.
Kunz, T., Woest, H., Lee, E.-J., Mller, C., & Methner, F. J. (2011). Improvement of the
oxidative wort and beer stability by increased unmalted barley proportion.
Brewing Science, 64, 75e82.
Leitao, C., Marchioni, E., Bergaentzle , M., Zhao, M., Didierjean, L., Miesch, L., et al.
(2012). Fate of polyphenols and antioxidant activity of barley throughout
malting and brewing. Journal of Cereal Science, 55, 318e322.
Lekkas, C., Hill, A. E., Taidi, B., Hodgson, J., & Stewart, G. G. (2009). The role of small
wort peptides in brewing fermentations. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 115,
134e139.
Lekkas, C., Stewart, G. G., Hill, A. E., Taidi, B., & Hodgson, J. (2005). The importance of
free amino nitrogen in wort and beer. Master Brewers Association of Americas,
42, 113e116.
Lekkas, C., Stewart, G. G., Hill, A. E., Taidi, B., & Hodgson, J. (2007). Elucidation of the
role of nitrogenous wort components in yeast fermentation. Journal of the
Institute of Brewing, 113, 3e8.
Lodolo, E. J., Kock, J. L. F., Axcell, B. C., & Brooks, M. (2008). The yeast Saccharomyces
cerevisiae the main character in beer brewing. FEMS Yeast Research, 8,
1018e1036.
Lowe, D., Ulmer, H., Van Sinderen, D., & Arendt, E. K. (2004). Application of bio-
logical acidication to improve the quality and processability of wort produced
from 50% raw barley. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 110, 133e140.
Lu, J., & Li, Y. (2006). Effects of arabinoxylan solubilization on wort viscosity and
ltration when mashing with grist containing wheat and wheat malt. Food
Chemistry, 98, 164e170.
Lu, J., Li, Y., & Gu, G. (2005). Control of arabinoxylan solubilization and hydrolysis in
mashing. Food Chemistry, 90, 101e108.
Lyu, J., Nam, P. W., Lee, S. J., & Lee, K. G. (2013). Volatile compounds isolated from
rice beers brewed with three medicinal plants. Journal of the Institute of
Brewing, 119, 271e279.
Malomo, O., Ogunmoyela, O. A. B., Oluwajoba, S. O., & Adekoyeni, O. O. (2012). Effect
of enzymes on the quality of beer/wort developed from proportions of sorghum
adjuncts. Advances in Microbiology, 2, 447e451.
Meussdoerffer, F., & Zarnkow, M. (2009). Starchy raw material. In A. S. Esslinger
(Ed.), Handbook in brewing (pp. 43e71). Freiberg: Wiley-VCH.
Palmer, G. H. (2006). Barley and malt. In F. G. Priest, & G. G. Stewart (Eds.), Handbook
of brewing (2nd ed., pp. 139e159). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
Piddocke, M. P., Fazio, A., Vongsangnak, W., Wong, M. L., Heldt-Hansen, H. P.,
Workman, C., et al. (2011). Revealing the benecial effect of protease supple-
mentation to high gravity beer fermentations using -omics techniques. Mi-
crobial Cell Factories, 27, 1e14.
Piddocke, M. P., Kreisz, S., Heldt-Hansen, H. P., Nilsen, K. F., & Olsson, L. (2009).
Physiological characterization of brewer's yeast in high-gravity beer fermen-
tations with glucose or maltose syrups as adjuncts. Applied Microbiology and
Biotechnology, 84, 453e464.
Pires, E. J., Teixeira, J. A., Branyik, T., & Vicente, A. A. (2014). Yeast: The soul of beer's
aroma - the review of avour-active esters and higher alcohols produced by the
brewing yeast. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 98, 1937e1949.
Pliansrithong, P., Usansa, U., & Wanapu, C. (2013). Increasing of nitrogenous sub-
stances in wort by using commercial enzymes and modifying mashing method.
International Journal of Bioscience, Biochemistry and Bioinformatics, 3, 404e407.
Poreda, A., Czarnik, A., Zdaniewicz, M., Jakubowski, M., & Antkiewicz, P. (2014). Corn
grist adjunct - application an inuence on the brewing process and beer quality.
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 120, 77e81.
Rautio, J., & Londesborough, J. (2003). Maltose transport by brewer's yeasts in
brewer's wort. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 109, 251e261.
Rehmanji, M., Gopal, C., & Mola, A. (2005). Beer stabilization technology - clearly a
matter of choice. Master Brewers Association of Americas, 42, 332e338.
Robinson, L. H., Healy, P., Stewart, D. C., Eglinton, J. K., Ford, C. H., & Evans, D. E.
(2007). The identication of a barley haze active protein that inuences beer
haze stability: The genetic basis of barley malt haze active protein. Journal of
Cereal Science, 45, 335e342.
Rossi, S., Sileoni, V., Perrettib, G., & Marconi, O. (2013). Characterization of the
volatile proles of beer using headspace solid-phase microextraction and gas
chromatography - mass spectrometry. Journal of the Science of Food and Agri-
culture, 94, 919e928.
Russell, I. (2006). Yeast. In F. G. Priest, & G. G. Stewart (Eds.), Handbook of brewing
(2nd ed., pp. 281e321). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
Ryder, D. S., & Power, J. (2006). Miscellaneous ingredients in aid of the process. In
F. G. Priest, & G. G. Stewart (Eds.), Handbook of brewing (2nd ed., pp. 333e375).
New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
Saison, D., De Schutter, D. P., Uyttenhove, B., Delvaux, F., & Delvaux, F. R. (2009).
Contribution of staling compounds to the aged avour of lager beer by studying
their avour thresholds. Food Chemistry, 114, 1206e1215.
Schnitzenbaumer, B., & Arendt, E. K. (2013). A comparative study of oat (Avena
sativa) cultivars as brewing adjuncts. European Food Research and Technology,
236, 1015e1025.
Schnitzenbaumer, B., & Arendt, E. K. (2014). Effect of unmalted oats (Avena sativa L.)
on the quality of high-gravity mashes and worts without or with exogenous
enzyme addition. European Food Research and Technology, 238, 225e235.
Schnitzenbaumer, B., Karl, C. A., & Arendt, E. K. (2013). A comparison of white
Nigerian and red Italian sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) as brewing adjuncts based
on optimized enzyme additions. Journal of American Society of Brewing Chem-
istry, 71, 248e257.
Schnitzenbaumer, B., Kaspar, J., Titze, J., & Arendt, E. K. (2014). Implementation of
commercial oat and sorghum ours in brewing. European Food Research and
Technology, 238, 515e525.
Schnitzenbaumer, B., Kerpes, R., Titze, J., Jacob, F., & Arendt, E. K. (2012). Impact of
various levels of unmalted oats (Avena sativa.) on the quality and processability
of mashes, worts and beers. Journal of American Society of Brewing Chemistry, 70,
 P. Bogdan, E. Kordialik-Bogacka / Trends in Food Science & Technology 65 (2017) 1e9
142e149.
Shen, N., Wang, J., Liu, C., Li, Y., & Li, Q. (2014). Domesticating brewing yeast for
decreasing acetaldehyde production and improving beer avour stability. Eu-
ropean Food Research and Technology, 238, 347e355.
Steiner, E., Auer, A., Becker, T., & Gastl, M. (2012). Comparison of beer quality at-
tributes between beers brewed with 100% barley malt and 100% barley raw
material. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 92, 803e813.
Steiner, E., Becker, T., & Gastl, M. (2010). Turbidity and haze formation in beer -
insights and overview. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 116, 360e368.
Stewart, G. G. (2006). Adjunct. In F. G. Priest, & G. G. Stewart (Eds.), Handbook of
brewing (2nd ed., pp. 161e174). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
Stewart, G. G., Hill, A., & Lekkas, C. (2013). Wort FAN - its characteristics and
importance during fermentation. Journal of American Society of Brewing Chem-
istry, 71, 179e185.
Stewart, G. G., Hill, A. E., & Russel, I. (2013). 125th anniversary review: De-
velopments in brewing and distilling yeast strains. Journal of the Institute of
Brewing, 119, 202e220.
Szwed, L., Tomaszewska-Ciosk, E., & Blazewicz, J. (2014). Simplied mashing ef-
ciency. Novel method for optimization of food industry wort production with
the use of adjuncts. Polish Journal of Chemical Technology, 3, 36e39.
Taylor, J. R. N., Dlamini, B. C., & Kruger, J. (2013). 125th Anniversary review: The
science of the tropical cereals sorghum, maize and rice in relation to lager beer
brewing. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 119, 1e14.
Tenge, C. (2009). Yeast. In A. S. Esslinger (Ed.), Handbook in brewing (pp. 119e141).
9
Freiberg: Wiley-VCH.
Tgel, I., Runyon, J. R., Galindo, F. G., & Nilsson, L. (2015). Analysis of polysaccharide
and proteinaceous macromolecules in beer using asymmetrical ow eld-ow
fractionation. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 121, 44e48.
Uvere, P. O., Ngoddy, P. O., & Nwankwo, C. N. S. (2014). Hardness as a modication
index for malting red and white sorghum (kafr) grains. Journal of the Science of
Food and Agriculture, 94, 890e897.
Vanderhaegen, B., Neven, H., Coghe, S., Verstrepen, K. J., Verachtert, H., &
Derdelinckx, G. (2003). Evolution of chemical and sensory properties during
aging of top-fermented beer. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 51,
6872e6890.
Vanderhaegen, B., Neven, H., Verachtert, H., & Derdelinckx, G. (2006). The chemistry
of beer aging - a critical review. Food Chemistry, 95, 357e381.
Yano, M., Back, W., & Krottenthaler, M. (2008). The impact of liquid adjuncts and
barley on wort and beer quality. Brewing Science, 61, 10e24.
Yano, M., Hideki, T., Imai, T., Ogawa, Y., & Ohochi, M. (2008). The effect of barley
adjuncts on free amino nitrogen contents in wort. Journal of the Institute of
Brewing, 114, 230e238.
Yeo, H. Q., & Liu, S. Q. (2014). An overview of selected specialty beers: De-
velopments, challenges and prospects. Journal of Food Science and Technology,
49, 1607e1618.
Zhu, L., Ma, T., Li, Y., & Li, Q. (2015). Permeability analysis of high-adjunct-ratio spent
grain layer in the high-gravity wort separation process. Process Biochemistry, 50,
846e852.