If Beta Glucan plays a big part in the beer characteristic generally known as “mouthfeel”, my question becomes:
Of the various popular and readily available barley base malt varietals (I.E, Harrington, Metcalfe, Klages, Maris Otter, etc…), which among them has the highest inherent level of beta glucan?
This document which I came across in another thread within this very forum provides at least a partial answer to my query. Of the barley malt varieties tested, Harrington 2-Row has far and away the highest levels of Beta Glucan. Could it be the malty mouthfeel champion?
Does anyone still grow Harrington?
Somebody must. Rahr Standard 2-row is blended with it and Metcalf.
“Rahr - A great base malt from the Northwest made from Harrington and Metcalf barley grown in the USA and malted in Minnesota at the Rahr malt house. Well modified and perfect for single infusion mashes. Clean flavor with a nice, floral aroma with a sweet taste make Rahr 2-row a fast growing malt of choice for many commercial brewers. Try this in your next beer and see the difference.”
Great Lakes brewery advertises that their highly rated “Elliot Ness” lager is made from Harrington barley.
Thanks for the info, guys.
But where does this big “if” come from?
I’m not aware of beta glucan having anything but negative impacts in brewing.
It must be broken down by glucanase in order to open up the endosperm to protein and carbohydrate modification, both in malting and in the mash. High levels of glucans not eliminated in malting and in the mash lead to low extract, difficult lautering, and, in the beer, difficult filtration. It is much better to have minimal levels in malt, so as to obviate the need for multiple low temperature rests in the mash program. Beta glucan as low as possible is what you look for on a COA, or you get ready for a rough brew day.
I believe it was Scott Janish who got me started upon the road of equating b-glucan levels with mouthfeel, primarily as to his article regarding increasing mouthfeel via the addition of oats. The object as it relates to mouthfeel is not in breaking b-glucan down, but rather in preserving it.
I don’t believe it is the glucans that are responsible for this contribution on the part of oats, but proteins and perhaps more importantly oils (a double edged sword to be sure.) In malt, significant glucan levels are a sign of improperly conducted malting and poor modification. In most unmalted adjuncts, they are inevitably along for the ride, and must be dealt with in the mash in order to have the advantage of whatever positive contributions the adjuncts may be capable of making. Some of the effects on foam and mouthfeel often attributed to beta glucans in some of these grains, moreover, are likely actually due to other polysaccharides such as pentosans (yet again, double edged sword) which simply occur in association with the glucans in those grains. I think that rather than pursuing a probable red herring in beta glucans, it would be more advantageous to seek a well modified malt with low glucan levels and a good suite of enzymes, and supplement it with well chosen adjuncts mashed for maximum effect.
That must come off an old description from the internet. The certificate of analysis I had from Rahr on the bags I bought of 2 row standard was 50% Pinnacle and 50% Copeland. The Pale Ale malt was 50% Copeland, 30% Metcalfe and 20% Synergy.
I just checked, and Great Lakes has changed their Eliot Ness advertisement as well. Where as late as last year it used to give a list of the malts and the hop (Mt Hood) beginning with Harrington 2-Row and 30L Caramel and (I believe) CaraMunich, now it indistinctly states that it is made from barley malts and mild hops (or something right close to this).
That’s interesting. I pulled that directly off the internet just before I posted it. I wonder why the difference in description.
I shot Rahr a note to see what they say.
My last sack of Rahr 2 row was 50/50 Harrington and Metcalfe, but that was about a year and a half ago. It’s going to change from crop year to crop year if not batch to batch, which is why it’s nice that they include this on their COAs.
That’s more like what I expected.
Wait a second. Beta-glucan does have negative effects in brewing and there are things that brewers do to address it. It is a haze producer and there is a mash temperature regime that is used to denature that component. Raw barley has plenty of beta-glucan, but the malting process consumes most of it. Modern, well-modified malts have little beta-glucan and there is little need to conduct that rest any more.
With that said, I don’t worry too much about clarity and having a bit of beta-glucan is OK with me. I regularly add a percent or so of flaked wheat to improve heading and mouthfeel.
Perhaps the most simple and easy way to increase the perception of mouthfeel is to decrease carbonation. Glycerol seems to play a big part as well.
I get the opposite perception from what you describe. Less carbonation perceives as less body, less mouthfeel. Still samples of beer always seem watery to me for average strength brews.
However, as you state, increased glycerol production does equate to increased mouthfeel to me, as well as increased foam production and stability.
This is what the Rahr Rep said. Makes sense.
“The varieties that make up the blend have changed depending on the crop years, but to my knowledge, 50% Pinnacle and 50% Copeland are that varieties used in the standard 2row in made in 2020 and 2019.”