This is the comment thread for the Breadtopia blog post originally published here:
If you do not see the “Reply” button, you will need to log in or register an account. Please click the blue “Log In” button in the upper right of the page. 
I have tried using the aliquot method as described here and I think it will work better for you if you put the smaller container in the same tub with your dough so that the conditions are more similar. I use a small plastic condiment cup with a lid and just nestle it into the surface of the dough. Then, the temperature is exactly the same when it goes in the proofing box (I actually use a Cooluli mini fridge/warming box, but it’s the same concept). I enjoyed reading your article!
It’s not entirely a matter of thermal mass. The aliquot is smaller, so it’s going to exchange heat faster, since surface area increases by squares and volume by cubes. (It’s why young children get cold more easily, and why body designs don’t scale up.) It’s interesting that everything arrived at the same temperature, since the fermentation would have produced some heat, and the larger dough would have retained it better.
I always enjoy your experiments, Melissa. They’re relevant and well-designed, and you’re always careful not to claim the results are more general than they are. I don’t want to change the subject, but if you ever wanted to look at autolysis I’d love to see your results.
Another possible contributing factor to the difference in rising rate between the aliquot and the bulk dough is that a much larger percentage of the dough in the aliquot is in direct contact with the container walls than with the bulk rising container. Is it possible that the resulting drag on the dough might inhibit the rise in the aliquot?
I gave up using an aliquot jar when I realized that the only accurate way to use one is to keep all the dough from changing temperature. Even then, I’m not certain it provides any more accurate information than assessing the rise in the bulk container. You did use it to assess total dough expansion (bulk + proof), which is hard to do any other way.
I’ve not thought of bulk and proof as part of the same whole fermentation time the way you do here. I think of proof as a function of bulk: a longer bulk needs a longer proof. That is, if the dough is rising slowly it’s going to proof slowly too.
Thanks Melissa for providing information on this process. I always used a long bulk fermentation process but have always wondered about this. But this also sparks a different question about the rise after shaping - on the counter immediately after shaping or overnight in the fridge. I have been using the overnight-in-the-fridge method because it is so convenient for me to bake early in the morning.
Was there any difference in taste or texture?
@Dawnbromberg That’s a good tip to put the aliquot in the same dough tub. Thank you! I’m glad you enjoyed the article.
@brianwhite142 Interesting and good points. I admit I only took the dough and aliquot temps three times and all in the first half of the process. I bet the tub of dough did get hotter from fermentation heat being trapped more. Later, shaping in a cooler kitchen probably cooled the doughs a bit…with one dough getting cooled sooner, but warming back up on the back end. I debated doing everything at my kitchen temp for this reason. Temperature is a beast of a variable. 
(I’m glad it’s coming through how much I don’t want these experiments to overstate.)
I did an autolysis experiment a while back. It was long-cold autolyse vs. short-warm autolyse.
I’d be into doing another. What would you be most interested in seeing compared?
@djd418 That is an interesting theory. I had actually expected the opposite – that the sides of the jar would be something for the dough to “climb” – but clearly that wasn’t the case! lol
@jmandel I agree re the aliquot – if I hadn’t been trying to assess total dough expansion, then the bulk in a straight-walled container gives me all the info I need. The final proof in the basket for me tends to be about experience/instinct/feel more than visible expansion. Though certainly I have more to master on that front still!
I think I agree with your view that the proofing rate has a similar pace as the bulk fermentation, all else equal. A buttery brioche sourdough takes a long time to double and a long time to puff up again after shaping. Meanwhile a high hydration whole grain dough bulks and proof fast because the fermentation is boosted by the hydration and the whole grain-ness. Not exactly an outlier, but a different pattern: micro-levain / tiny inoculation lean doughs – soooo many hours pass with almost no change to the dough and then finally it seems like the microbe population reaches a critical mass, and the dough behaves like it has 17% sourdough starter for the rest of the bulk and also the proof.
@mymanvan I very much prefer the convenience most of the final proof timewise happening in the refrigerator. I do leave it some time at room temp depending on the state of the dough and kitchen temp (hot kitchen/dough, then right into the fridge). If you shape at less bulk fermentation/dough expansion, then you may want longer RT time before the cold or longer time in the cold. Here is an experiment I did with that (of course, two days in the refrigerator makes a more sour bread too, so that is something to consider):
@mjrosier I didn’t notice a difference in flavor or texture between these two. However, I took a third dough farther in all ways by accident about a week later and it was a little more crumbly in texture. I didn’t have the other two around for flavor comparison, but it certainly was tasty : )
Thanks for the link, Melissa. I was pretty sure you would have looked at autolysis, but for some reason I missed finding the article, which addressed some of my questions.
What I was really wondering was how much you gain by doing it at all. My reference point is Eric’s Poilane-style bread, which I make with Turkey Red and hard white wheat, so it’s 100% whole grain, which I grind as needed. It isn’t clear to me that you want to autolyse freshly ground flour, and you probably wouldn’t gain anything by autolysing rye flour, which doesn’t have much gluten, or spelt, whose gluten is already pretty extensible.
In any case I have made it without the refrigeration step, once, when I was short of time, and it seemed fine. Since that step takes up a whole day, it would be nice to know if it’s really useful. Having done a related experiment, what’s your impression?
Something similar to autolysis is plainly useful in making the dough, in any case. Stretch and fold is perfectly valid, but I find it a lot more satisfying to knead, where possible. Letting the dough rest after roughly mixing the ingredients together makes that easier; the flour hydrates, and the gluten begins to develop, which cuts the kneading time. For true autolysis you’d want to add the yeast and salt later, but simply resting the dough is quite useful. My experience is that this particular dough will get too sticky after 45 minutes, while 10-20 minutes works out fine, and 30 minutes probably would, too.
I believe that if your bulk fermentation is going to be longer than 5-6 hours, then skipping this step won’t make much of a difference. All the benefits of autolysis will happen during this slow fermentation anyway.
When I try to make faster breads though, the autolyse can be crucial to speed up gluten development and/or soften bran before the dough blows up and needs to be baked.
When I use flours like einkorn or rye, the autolyse is better skipped or short because they’re so enzymatically active already.
So for the specifics of your question, my guess is that lengthening the process of Eric’s Poilane bread bulk fermentation from say 12 hours warm to 24 hours cold maybe impacts flavor and structure a bit, but not in a better or worse way. I’d do it the way you prefer if you like the outcome.
Great experiment as usual Melissa. I have noticed the difference in bulk fermentation myself as I started using a 75% rise and now 100% in the aliquot jar. As you stated the difference in flours can be great. As far as the difference between temps of the aliquot jar, are we maybe trying to be a little to technical? But then maybe that is why some breads turn out different than others with all other consideration are the same. Most of my bakes are done using the cooler @40F for at least 12 hours but have gone 4 days. When I get my proof box thermometer back in I can do slow bulks at 50-55F and then a final proof at rising box temperatures to room temp. Picture is from a 40F final proof.
Don’t want to hijack this thread but what I know about the way commercially ground flours are tested for protein I do not autolyse home ground whole wheat (especially if the bran and germ have been sifted in) and never rye (other than letting the grain absorb water for a few minutes.) Vital Wheat Gluten is always added to my dough.
Thanks for the reply. In fact I didn’t notice much difference the one time I tried it. Given how long it ferments while warm, the refrigeration step seemed like overkill, particularly for 100% whole grain.
I’ve heard it claimed that enzymes are active enough in freshly milled flour that autolysis isn’t indicated. It wouldn’t be helpful for the rye in the recipe, as you say, and a lot of the flour in it is spelt, which wouldn’t benefit in terms of gluten development, since its gluten is already pretty extensible. As for softening the bran, I wouldn’t expect an issue, and didn’t see one. The structure of the bread seemed quite okay without the refrigeration step. So taste is the one issue I was really wondering about, and of course that’s easy enough to sort out, but I was wondering if I was overlooking anything.
One of the things I love about science, or any kind of honest investigation, is that it isn’t a matter of taking somebody else’s word for something, or following along blindly with existing practices. It reminds me of an old Zen story. A monastery had a cat, and during meditation the roshi would lock it in a closet so it wouldn’t disturb anyone. When the monks started their own monasteries, they went looking for cats to lock up in a closet.
I think your observations on this dough make sense. Thank you for sharing the Zen story. What a perfect allegory for how we struggle to understand causation and correlation in the world. Also it reminded me of @homebreadbaker 's first paragraph in this article:
I think that this is because the process of baking sourdough bread has a lot of interdependent and invisible variables involved which collectively affect the results a lot, and that makes it a bit mysterious. So, just like they do with the mystery of existence itself, people evolve various beliefs and rituals in the face of their lack of knowing. And just like there are many different ways to live and to understand the tremendum in which we find ourselves, there are also many different ways to successfully bake a loaf of sourdough bread.
Sorry I’m just a tad confused on how you are determining extent of expansion without first doing a dough test to find out the full extent of expansion and using that as a reference. So how do you know your dough is 75% expanded before you know what a 100% is? I assume you know 100% because it stopped expanding.
In this experiment, the percents are just a way of saying how much the dough expanded relative to its starting size. Doubled = 100% expansion of the dough compared with its starting size. 120% = doubled + 1/5 of starting size more.
My decision to bake at 120% expansion was pretty arbitrary though, just instinct/experience saying it was time to get the doughs in the oven : )
