Composition of Brewing Syrups


by I. C. MacWilliam
(Brewing Industry Research Foundation, Nutfield, Redhill, Surrey)

Received 3rd Decetnber, 1970

The composition of various syrups derived from barley, malt, maize and wheat and of worts prepared from them has been surveyed.  Wider variations in the concentrations of fermentable carbohydrates occurred in these worts than in malt worts.  Total nitrogen contents in the diluted barley and malt syrups examined were generally similar to those of wort. Certain amino acids were present in greater amounts in barley syrups than in wort but it is doubtful whether the differences are of practical significance.  Only very limited information was found on the lipid, tannin and mineral contents of syrups.

Introduction and Discussion
Increasing use is being made in brewing of various syrups derived from barley, malt, maize or wheat to assist in wort preparation.  Many of the syrups from barley, maize and wheat are prepared by procedures, using acid or added enzymes, which differ from that of mashing and their composition may vary therefore from that of wort in certain respects.  It is the object of the present communication to survey the composition of representative syrups and worts derived from them to allow assessment of these variations. Details of total solid (Table 1), carbohydrate (Table II) nitrogenous materials (Tables III and IV) including amino acids (Table V), lipids (Table VI), phosphate (Table VI), tannins and anthocyanogens (Table VII) and mineral contents (Table VIII) of such syrups have been assembled in a manner similar to that used in a recent survey11 of wort composition. For convenience, normal ranges of values for these components in conventional worts are included in the Tables.  Only one report15 has quoted values for vitamin contents, barley syrups being found to contain between 6-1 and 10-4 μg  ᴅ-biotin per litre compared to 7-9-12-1 μg / litre in conventional worts.

Acknowledgement.—The author thanks Dr. A. H. Cook, F.R.S., for his guidance and advice given throughout the writing of this review.

1. Brewer, W. J., Modern Brewery Age, 1900, 73, (1). 34.
2. Brobst, K. M., & Lott. C. E., Proceedings of the American Society of Brewing Chemists,
    1968, 71.
3. Collier, J. A., Brewer’s Guild Journal, 1970, 56, 242.
4. Griffin. O. T. Collier, J. A.. & Shields, P. S. D.. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 1968, 74,
5. Griffin, O., Brewer’s Guild Journal, 1968. 54, 79.
6. Harris. J. O., Brewer’s Guild Journal. 1968, 54, 9.
7. Harris, J. O., Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 1969. 72, 243.
8. Heron, J. R., Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 1966. 72, 450.
9. Jenkins, C. R., Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 1970, 76, 481.
10. Kolbach, P. & Schilfarth. H., Tageszeitung für Brauerei, 1964, 61. 54.
11. MacWilliam. I. C, Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 1908, 74, 38.
12. Maiden, A. M., Brewer’s Guild Journal, 1962. 48. 565, 630.
13. Maule, A. P., & Greenshields, R. N., Process Biochemistry. 1970, 5 (2), 39.
14. Otter. G. E., Popplewell, J. A., & Taylor, L. Proceedings of the European Brewery
     Convention. 1969. 481.
15. Rainbow, C, Brewers’ Guardian. 1970, 99. (6) 58.
16. Rosenfeld, K. J., Technical Quarterly, Master Brewers Association of America. 1970, 7, 119.
17. Schur, F., Ullmann, F.. Schlienger, E., and Pfenninger, H., Brauwissenschaft, 1968, 21, 413.
18. Zieglcr. L. Brauwelt, 1969, 109. 557.

%d bloggers like this: