Development of a laboratory baking test for Uruguayan French style hearth bread using Canadian wheat flour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Straight grade Canadian wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) flours milled from a high and medium protein Canada Western Red Spring (CWRS) wheat, a commercial sample of Canada Prairie Spring Red (CPSR) wheat and a recently released CPSR variety, 5700PR, were used to develop and assess the impact of absorption, fermentation time and flour type on a laboratory-scale Uruguayan French style hearth bread baking procedure. The lean formula dough, containing flour, yeast, ascorbic acid, malt, yeast food and optimum water absorption as determined by dough feel, was mixed to peak development in a GRL 1000 mixer, fermented, and divided into multiple (175-g) pieces. Dough pieces were sheeted and moulded using a commercial hearth bread moulder, proofed, cut (diagonal top surface cut) and baked in a modified National laboratory oven equipped with steam. Optimum dough absorption for all four flours was 62% in spite of a wide range in farinograph absorption. Optimum fermentation time was 75 min based on moulded dough length, bread volume and form, cut width and crumb texture and colour. The lower protein CWRS and the CPSR variety, PR5700, showed superior overall performance relative to the other wheat flours. The performance of the commercial CPSR flour was clearly inferior to all other wheat flours. Excellent reproducibility was obtained for all measured parameters allowing good discrimination among samples. This baking procedure should prove useful in assessing the performance of Canadian wheat classes and varieties for Uruguay and other South American markets where similar bread is popular. Key words: Triticum aestivum L., wheat, baking, hearth bread, Uruguayan bread, Canadian wheat, Canada Western Red Spring, Canada Prairie Spring Red
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".