Kelly Ortega DFM 357:

Experimental Food Studies

November 14, 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LAB 1: BASIC TECHNIQUES AND MEASUREMENTS ....................................................................... 2-6
LAB 2: SENSORY EVALUATION ......................................................................................................... 7-13
LAB 3: CRYSTALLIZATION ............................................................................................................... 14-19
LAB 4: THICKENING AGENTS ........................................................................................................... 20-23
LAB 5: FIBER ........................................................................................................................................ 24-27
LAB 6: FATS AND OILS ....................................................................................................................... 28-31
LAB 7: MILK PROTEINS ...................................................................................................................... 32-36
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................ 37-38

Lab 1: Basic Techniques and Measurements

September 5, 2014
Lab Conditions: Normal
Purpose
The purpose of today was to experience and understand the importance of accurate
measurements.
Experimental Procedures
The lab instructor provided the instructions for DFM 357 Lab #1 and the exact instructions are
listed in Tables #1-3. In the Basic Measuring Techniques lab, in three trials students measured a
variety of common household baking products and recorded the average.
Results
Refer to Tables #1-3.
Basic Measuring Techniques
1 Cup

1
2
3

a1
a2
a3

a4

a5

Table 1.1
Bread flour, unsifted, fill cup by a spoon

Trial 1
128.1g

Trial 2 Trial 3 Average

131.1g 129.9g 129.7g

Bread flour, unsifted, minus 2 tablespoons

115.6g

117.9g 117.5g 117g

Bread flour, sifted, lightly fill cup by a

spoon, no packing or shaking. Level top
with edge of a straight knife or spatula
All purpose flour, sifted, packed and tapped
into a cup with a spoon

117.2g

120.4g 123.3g 120.3g

130.4g

123.5g 121.3g 125.1g

All purpose flour, sifted, lightly fill cup by

spoon, no packing or shaking. Level top
with edge of a straight knife or spatula, then
minus 2 tablespoons, level top with edge of
a straight knife carefully.

96.3g

90.0g

197.8g

204.8g 197.0g 199.9g

102.8g 96.4g

b- Water
1
1/4 Cup

c1

Table 1.2
Brown sugar, packed and tapped into a cup
with a spoon.

Trial 1
34.2g

Trial 2 Trial 3 Average

35.1g 34.9g 34.7g

c2

Brown sugar, lightly fill cup by a spoon, no 29.8g

packing or shaking. Shake and level top with
edge of a straight knife or spatula

31.2g

27.2g

29.4g

26.3g

25.7g

24.7g

25.6g

36.5g

38.5g

36.2g

37.1g

36.0g

36.9g

39.7g

37.5g

43.1g

44.2g

43.8g

43.7g

c3

Granulated sugar or powder sugar, fill cup

by a spoon.

10

d- Hydrogenated fat
1

11

d- Oil
2

12

d- Butter
3
1
teaspoon
Table 1.3

13

e1

Trial 1
8.9g

Trial 2 Trial 3 Average

7.7g
9.0g
8.5g

3.8g

3.6g

3.7g

3.7g

8.0g

9.4g

9.4g

26.8g

Table salt

14

e2

Kosher salt

15

e3

Sea salt

Discussion
The importance of accurate measurements is a crucial step in the process of
conducting a cooking experiment. In this lab, we administered measurements of basic
ingredients used in cooking. In Tables 1.1 through 1.3 each measurement was done three times
and the average was taken from the three trials. We hypothesized that the measurements would
come 0.5-1 gram from each other each other every trial because we were measuring the same
product the exact same way all three times. The way measurements are taken can affect the end

products yield and the consistent quality of the product. This lab gave us the opportunity to see
the different factors of how the procedure of measuring an ingredient contributes to accuracy.
There are different ways to accurately measure an ingredient. According to Gisslen, in
Professional Cooking when we measure a liquid it is usually best to measure it by volume
using a cup or a teaspoon. When measuring a solid it is more accurate to measure it by weight
using grams. The accurate way to measure ingredients by volume would be to fill a dry-volume
measure until the ingredient is mounded over the top. Then, level it off with a spatula or
straightedge (Gisslen, 2010). For accuracy, we measured all our ingredients by weight. Our
results reflected that the yield was never the same for the ingredients in the three trials. This is
evident in many trials, but one specific example is in Table 1.3 in E-1 when table salt was
measured. In trial 1 the yield was 8.9g, trial 2 the yield was 7.7g and trial 3 the yield was 9.0g.
Our hypothesize that was formulated of a difference of 0.5g to 1g was close, but wrong. In this
measurement with table salt there was an up to 2.3g differences in the 2nd trial to the third. The
different yields show the importance of measuring and attempting to be as exact as possible
because a different yield could affect the end product drastically.
An error I noticed in this particular measuring step was how my partner and I measure
things differently. We both have different techniques and understanding of how to measure
ingredients, thus at times giving us different yields. This is a perfect example of how clear and
detailed procedures should be written for an experiment to get a correct yield.
The measurements are a very important in the process, but the way the procedure method
is written when measuring and ingredient is just as important. This is clearly evident in the error
I noted between how my partner and I measure, but also in Table 2.1 the difference of measuring
brown sugar with different procedures. In Table 2.1, C-1 the procedure is instructing to have the

brown sugar packed and tapped into a cup with a spoon. In C-2 it is more detailed and instructs
us to lightly fill the cup by a spoon, no packing or shaking, shake and level top with edge of a
straight knife. Both times we were measuring cup and the average in C-1 was 34.7 grams and
in C-2 it was 29.4g. This shows the importance of writing a clear and concise procedure for an
experiment. The way that procedure method is written can affect the yield greatly and in this
case there was a 5.3 g difference.
In Foods Experimental Perspectives McWilliams describes the careful and precise
preparation that needs to be considered when developing the written statement of the method.
The method needs to be written in a way that anyone would be able to prepare the same
product. He describes the detail that needs to be put into writing a method for mixing. For
example, this would be something to consider when writing a procedure method of mixing the
type of mixing utensil to be used, the number of strokes (revolutions, or other appropriate
control), and the rate (strokes per minute). The usual statements in recipes such as stir until
blended are too vague to be followed in an experiment (McWilliams, 2013, p. 34-35). The
difference in how C-1 and C-2 in Table 2.2 are written are examples of the difference in the way
the measuring method described is important.
In this experiment, I was able to connect this with some deeper understanding of the
importance in measuring in my own life. For example, at work I make smoothies and understand
now the importance of measurements and how they affect the quality of our end product, the
smoothie. If there is too much or too little of any ingredient the smoothie will taste completely
different. For example, with the ice if there is too little ice then the smoothie will be too fluid and
have no thick consistency. The amount of ice is very crucial because it is what gives the
consistency of the smoothie.

Overall, when measuring an ingredient the procedure method described and executed can
greatly affect the measurement and overall end product. When measuring consistent instructions
and methods must be used. This was a perfect introduction to the experimental food course
because it was able to highlight the importance of accuracy in measuring and the necessity for
clear written procedures.

Lab 2: Sensory Evaluation

September 12, 2014
Lab Conditions: Normal
Purpose
The purpose of todays lab was to evaluate the role of primary taste and the effect of color on the
perception of flavor using various sensory evaluation test. The sensory evaluation test includes:
paired comparison, triangle, duo-trio, and the hedonic scale.
Experimental Procedures
The lab instructor prepared and coded a series of solutions according to directions in Appendix A
ahead of time for the class. The class rotated through each series. For each series, the instructions
were to pour a one-teaspoon sample into a clean cup, taste, and evaluate according to the testing
method indicated. Following each taste, each student was instructed to rinse their mouth with
water. When the students were finished, they compared their results with the composition of
each solution. This experiment was conducted in silence.
Results
Refer to Series A- L.
Series A: Identification of the Primary Tastes
Identification Bitter Sour Salt Sweet Umami
Individual

281

798

569

825

372

Correct key #

372

798

569

825

281

Series B: Effect of Acid on Sweetness: Paired Comparison Sensory Test

Identification

Less Sweet

More Sweet

Individual

142

Correct key #

293: Sucrose 142: Sucrose + Citric Acid (more sweet)

293

No Difference
N/A

Series C: Effect of Salt on Sweetness: Triangle Sensory Test

Identification Two of the Same Different Sample Different Sample:
Individual

879 & 621

190

Less Sweet

N/A

Correct Key to Series C:

Identification Ingredients
621

Sucrose (621 & 879 are the same)

256

Sucrose + Salt (more sweet)

7

879

Sucrose

Series D: Effect of Sugar on Saltiness: Paired Comparison Sensory Test

Identification Less Salty More Salty No Difference
Individual

876

190

N/A

Correct Key to Series D

Identification Ingredients
190

Salt

876

Salt + Sucrose (less salty)

Series E: Effect of Sugar on Sourness (Acidity): Paired Comparison Sensory Test

Identification Less Sour More Sour No Difference
Individual

453

186

N/A

Correct Key to Series E

Identification Ingredients
186

Citric Acid

453

Citric Acid + Sucrose (less sour)

Series F: Effect of Sugar on Bitterness: Paired Comparison Sensory Test

Identification Less Bitter More Bitter No Difference
Individual

468

739

N/A

Correct Key to Series F

Identification Ingredients
739

Caffeine

468

Caffeine + Sucrose (less bitter)

Series G: Effect of a different type of sugar: Duo-Trio Test

Identification Ingredients
Individual

222&438

Correct key # 222&438 are Sucrose; 724 is agave syrup

8

Series H: Effect of Above Threshold Levels of Salt on Sweetness: Triangle Test

Identification Identical to Standard Sweeter/Less Sweet
Individual

253

308

Correct Key to Series H

Identification Ingredients
308

Sucrose (the different sample)

253 Reference Sucrose + Salt

129

Sucrose + Salt

Series I: Effect of Processing Method on the Flavor of Lemonade: Consumer Preference

Hedonic Scale Sensory Test
Identification
Individual

Ingredients
Sample #470 : Like Very Much
Sample #598: Dislike Very Much
Sample #229: Like Slightly

Correct key # Sample #470 : Frozen Lemonade

Sample #598: Dired Lemonade Mix
Sample #229: Fresh Lemonade
Series J: Effect of Color on Flavor
Identification

Ingredients

Individual

382, 296 432, 871. All taste the same in identification.

Correct key # 382, 296, 432, 871.

All samples were the same (lemonade), only the colors were different.

Series K: Effect of Genetic Predisposition on Tasting Phenylthiocarbamide

(PTC)
Taste a PTC taste paper. Do you taste anything, and if you do, what is the quality?
- Nothing. Absolutely, no taste.

Series L: Perception of flavor without visual cues: Have your lab partner choose a jellybean
flavor for you. With your eyes closed, have your partner place the jellybean in your palm. Eat the
jellybean. Guess what flavor it is and compare it to the actual flavor. Describe what happened.
- I guessed that my jellybean was orange, but it was really lime. The tartness was leaning me
towards a citrus fruity flavor, but I could not pinpoint the exact one.
Discussion
There are five primary senses that are used in sensory evaluations, which are smell, taste,
sight, touch and sound. The sense of smell is the number one detection of flavor and is activated
by sniffing, swallowing and exhaling vigorously after swallowing. This is first in our sense due
to the fact that we have over 10 million olfactory receptors compared to only 10,000 taste buds
(Batten, 2014). The second most important sense is taste. The four basic tastes, which include
salty, bitter, sweet, and sour, were evaluated in lab using different sensory evaluations.
In Series A, we were to identify our primary taste sensation of what we perceived from
the solution. I was able to identify the sour, salt and sweet taste correctly, but had trouble
identifying between umami and bitter taste. The umami reminded me of tea. It somewhat tasted
salty at first, then bitter. Umami is supposed to enhance the savory qualities without having a
distinct taste itself. I am still not sure why this tasted bitter because we were not informed on
what the solution was.
In Series B, we were to use a paired comparison sensory test to identify the effect of acid
on sweetness. In a paired comparison test there is a 50% chance of being correct because there is
one difference to be identified between two solutions (McWilliams, 2012). I was not able to
identify the solution that was different, which in this case was the sweeter solution. The solutions
were sucrose and one had an addition of citric acid. Citric acid made the solution sweeter.
In Series C, we were to identify the effect of salt on sweetness utilizing a triangle sensory
test. The purpose of this test was to identify the different sample from a series of three different

10

solutions. I was able to identify the two samples that were the same, which were both sucrose
and the different sample that was sucrose and salt. In conclusion, when salt is added into a
solution of sucrose the solution becomes sweeter.
Series D was the opposite of Series C. Using a paired comparison test we were to identify
the effects of sugar on saltiness. I was able to identify the solution that was salt and sucrose and
just salt. The solution that had sugar added was less salty that the solution of just salt. Therefore,
sugar decreases saltiness.
Series E and Series F were both paired comparison sensory tests measuring the effects of
sugar on a specific taste sensation. In Series E we specifically measured the effect of sugar on
saltiness and in Series F the effect of sugar on bitterness. I was able to distinguish between the
effects of sugar in both solutions. I was able to taste the reaction that sucrose had on salt in series
E and on citric acid is series F. In these both cases, the sugar, sucrose, decreased saltiness and
sourness in the solutions.
Series G tested the effect of a different type of sugar using the duo-trio test. The Duo-trio
test is like the paired comparison test in which there is a 50% chance of being correct. In this test
there is one control and two samples that are to be distinguished from each other. One of the two
samples is the same as the control (McWilliams, 2012). I was able to identify that two of the
samples were the same and they were sucrose. The other sample was agave syrup, which was a
different sugar with it being sweeter than sucrose, but with a bitter after taste.
A triangle test was conducted on Series H, which was testing the effect of above
threshold levels of salt on sweetness. In this test, the goal was to distinguish the solution that
tasted different from the three (McWilliams, 2012). I was able to taste that one solution was

11

much sweeter than the other two. The other two solutions were sucrose and salt this therefore
presented that salt in large amounts decreases sweetness.
Series I tested the effect of processing method on the flavor of lemonade. The consumer
preference hedonic scale sensory test is a pleasure scale that ranks samples in order of
preference (McWilliams, 2012). This test was rating frozen lemonade, dried lemonade mix, and
fresh squeezed lemonade. In Sample #598, which was dried lemonade mix; I was able to taste
the difference in this mix immediately. It had a very artificial taste compared to sample #470 and
sample #229. I actually liked the sample #470, which was frozen lemonade, a bit more than
sample #229, which was frozen lemonade. This clearly has to do with ones own taste
preferences.
Series J and Series L were the most interesting test of all. This was a chance to see the
true bias of a persons senses and to see if the perception of sight overrides the perception of
taste. The color of the solutions did affect my perceived flavor at first, but then I realized they
were all the same. I was expecting a type of flavor from the color of the solution. The fact that
they were different colors made me want to taste something different, but all the solutions were
lemonade.
In Series K we were instructed to taste a Phenylthiocarbamide paper. This was to test if
we had a genetic predisposition to tasting bitterness. Recent studies have shown that most
supertasters, or people who can taste the bitterness of a PTC paper, are women. The sensitivity to
tasting the bitterness has been associated with enhanced perception of other bitter compounds,
such as saccharin and caffeine, which are found in ordinary foods (Drewnowski, 1997). This can
be linked to why some people do not like the taste of certain vegetables because of a genetic
predisposition to tasting bitterness.

12

Series L was somewhat like Series J in which we were to perceive a flavor without a
visual cue. Our partner put a jellybean in our hands and we were to guess the flavor of it. I
guessed that my jellybean was orange, but it was lime. This is an even more interesting concept
because a question that arises was how do they create these artificial flavors to match the concept
of the flavor of a food.
After lab I noticed that I really did not use my sense of smell much. Considering that the
sense of smell is the most important sense I think that my sense of sight was the biggest role
player in this experiment. I was very discouraged by drinking colorless, sweet things. This was
not enticing at all for me. I never really took into account how important the sight of something
can be in eating, or in this case, drinking a product.

13

Lab 3: Crystallization
September 19, 2014
Laboratory Conditions: Normal

Purpose
The purpose of todays lab was to observe the crystallization effects of sugars under different
circumstances, such as temperatures, cooking methods, and ingredients.

Experimental Procedures
In lab we were assigned to make vanilla caramels with light cream. The previous lab had used all
the light cream, so we replaced the light cream in our recipe with 50% half & half milk and 50%
cream. The instructions are as follows.

Vanilla Caramels:
Cook to end point temperature of 118oC (1440F).
130 g sugar
14 g margarine
65 g brown sugar
1 g salt
54 g light corn syrup
5 g vanilla extract
149 g light cream
Mix all ingredients except vanilla. Place on medium high heat initially and lower heat as cooking
continues. Stir occasionally at beginning of cooking and constantly toward end of process. Cook
to firm-ball stage (118oC) (1440F). Add vanilla. Turn into oiled pan. Cool. This is a soft, rich,
chewy caramel.
Results
Table 3.1 : Fondant Results
Variation

Cooking Beating
Temp. o Temp. o
C
C

Beating
Time

Color

Texture Consistency Flavor

9 opaque,

A. Fondant
1. Beating

114

114

6 crumbly,

Sugar, very

14

temp.

3 min.

very
white

crumbly

firm

sweet

a
b

114

70

1 min. 30
sec.

3 cream
white

3 gooey, hard

Sugar

114

40

3 min. 8
sec.

5 shiny
white

5 moldable
soft,
Marshmallow

Different
taste of the
others

2. Corn Syrup

114

40

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

7 soft,
crumbles

White
chocolate,
vanilla

3. Cream
Fondant

114

60

17 min.

Table 3.2 : Fudge & Divinity Results

Variation

Cooking Beating Beating

Temp. o Temp. o Time
C
C

Color

Texture Consistency Flavor

B. Fudge
1. Cooking temp. 110

44

4:46 min

Light
Brown

Fine

Firm/Chewy

Chocolate
Sweet

b 113

56

3:09 min

Dark
Brown

Course

Crumbles

Chocolate
Sweet

c 118

67

1:20 min

Dark
Brown

Course

Dry/Crumbly

Chocolate
Sweet

110

7 min

Dark
Brown

Firm

Grainy

Rich
Chocolate

b 113

40

10min

Medium
Brown

Crumbles

Soft

Chocolate

c 113

48

5min

Medium
Brown

Smooth

Soft

Chocolate

2. Beating
temp.
&
speed

113

15

90.5

32.5

15 min

Dark
Brown

Smooth

Fluid/Sticky

Dark
Chocolate

b 94.5

35.4

8min 50
Sec.

Regular
Brown

Rough
top

Thick

Vanilla

127

115

2min

White

Crumbly

Melts in mouth

3. Microwave

C. Divinity

Table 3.3 : Caramels, Peanut Brittles, and Lollipop Results

Variation

Cooking
Temp.

Color

Texture Consistency Flavor

A. Vanilla
caramels
1. Light cream

118F

Light
Brown

Grainy

Chewy/Thick

Sweet Vanilla

2. Evaporated
milk

118F

Dark
Brown

Smooth

Gooey/Thick

Vanilla/Caramel

B. Peanut brittle

150F

Brown

Smooth

Crunchy

Sweet
Caramel/+Peanuts

152-155F

Clear
orange
/brown

Hard

Smooth

Burned /Citrus

C. Lollipop

Discussion
In this experimental food lab the class made crystalline candies and amorphous candies
also classified as mom-crystalline candies. The crystalline candies made included fondant,
divinity, and fudge. These candies have an organized crystalline areas and some liquid trapped
inside the crystals. When making these candies a small crystal size is desired. The amorphous
candies included peanut brittle, lollipops, and the caramels. These candies lack an organized
crystalline structure because of their very high concentration or interfering substances (Batten,
2014).

16

In Table 3.1 fondant was made with variations in beating temperatures. The different
beating temperatures affect the crystal nuclei formation by changing the color of the fondant. As
seen in the highest beating temperature of 117 degrees Celsius (Table 3.1, 1A) the color was
much whiter and opaque, the lowest beating temperature of 40 degrees Celsius (Table 3.1, 1A)
was clear white. There was an error in the making of the variation with corn syrup, so we did not
get to observe the results on that. Although, in Food Science: An Ecological Approach
Edelstein describes that corn syrup can be replaced with cream of tartar because it works as an
interfering substance by inhibiting formation of crystals. As well as that cream of tartars
function in a crystalline candy is to inhibit crystal size and to decrease the rate of crystallization,
so they are interchangeable (Edelstein, 2013).
As for as the effect on crystal size of replacing water with cream in table 3.1, 3 there is an
apparent consistency change. It is very smooth and thick because of the presence of fat. There is
a color difference in fondant made with cream of tartar versus fondant made with corn syrup
because when you add corn syrup in place of cream of tartar, you are adding more sugar. When
you add more sugar into a product with high heat there will be a color change and possibly a
browning process happening (McWilliams, 2012, p.148).
In table 3.2 we see the making of fudge and divinity. The functions of milk, cream,
chocolate, and egg white serve to give the crystalline candies a finer texture. This is seen when
the fat interferes with the aggregation of crystals in fudge. The fudge is more likely to have a
smooth texture than is a simple fondant made with water as the liquid and no added fat. The
temperature of beating affects crystalline nuclei formation in the way that when stirring the fudge
after it cools it creates small sugar crystals versus stirring the fudge while its hot forms large
sugar crystals. The large sugar crystals are not desired because they make gritty fudge versus
17

smooth fudge from small sugar crystals (Batten, 2014). Microwave times may be difficult to
determine when making fudge because the microwaves are controlling and dispersing the heat,
one doesnt get a true sense when the fudge reached it point of complete formation. Also the
dispersion of heat is uneven.
In table 3.3 we made caramels, peanut brittle & lolipops. These candies do not crystallize
because of high concentrations of sugar and interfering substances. The variation here was the
making of the caramels with light cream and evaporated milk. The difference in consistency of
using light cream and evaporated milk is due to their level of fat and their roles as interfering
substances. For peanut brittle, there is aeration in the process in order for carbon dioxide gas to
be produced from the baking soda. (Brown, 2010, p.525)
My partner and I were assigned to make caramels and there was an error in the process of
making it. The first time around it burned because we let it reach above 163 degrees Celsius or
325 degrees Fahrenheit. Above that temperature the caramel becomes dark and bitter (Brown,
2010, p.525). That is exactly what happened to our candies, although the second time around the
caramels came out a perfect light brown color and sweet. The heating of these candies is a very
delicate process and it is very time and temperature sensitive.
One thing that caught my attention in lab was the ingredient of light-corn syrup in the
making of most candies, and particularly in the making our caramels. I was curious to research
the difference of light corn syrup to high fructose corn syrup. In general, corn syrup is made by a
hydrolysis of cornstarch to convert the starch into sugars. Corn syrup is used to control
crystallization in candies and increases browning in foods. Light corn syrup is a combination of
corn syrup and high fructose corn syrup in addition to vanilla flavor and salt to enhance the

18

flavor. Light corn syrup is clear and tastes moderately sweet (Wittenberg, 2007, p.243). In
general, there is not much difference and there is even some high fructose corn syrup in light
corn syrup.

19

Lab 4: Thickening Agents

September 26, 2014
Lab Conditions: Normal
Purpose
The purpose of todays experimental food lab was to observe the results of a variety of starchbased agents in food products with various levels of sugar.

Experimental Procedures
Each student was given a specific thickening agent. My lab partner and I were assigned oat flour
as our thickening agent. The following are the procedures followed:
Mix 15 g (2 T) thickening agent (Oat Flour) with indicated amount of sugar then add 1 cup of
water. Heat until thickened. Turn down the heat to low and cook for 5 minutes, stirring only
occasionally. Flour and cornstarch must reach a near boiling temperature for thickening to
occur. Freeze of each product to thaw and evaluate later.

Results
Table 4.1
Rate: Thickness 9 (thickest)
consistent) 1 (least consistent)
N Thickening
Additi
o. Agent
on of
Sugar

1
a

Corn Starch
(15g)

No
sugar

1
b

Corn Starch
(15g)

25g
(2 Tb)

1
c
2
a

Corn Starch
(15g)
Flour (15g)

75g (6
Tb)
No
sugar

2
b

Flour (15g)

25g
(2 Tb)

1 (thinnest); Transparent 9(most transparent) 1 (opaque); Consistency 9 (most

Gelat
inization
Tem
p

Thic
kness

Transp
arency

Consistency
As
Cooke
d

Comments

After
freezing

20

2
c
3
a

Flour (15g)
Barley flour
(15g)

75g (6
Tb)
No
sugar

3
b

Barley flour
(15g)

25g
(2 Tb)

3
c
4
a

Barley flour
(15g)
Tapioca (15g)

75g (6
Tb)
No
sugar

4
b

Tapioca (15g)

25g
(2 Tb)

4
c
5
a

Tapioca (15g)
Potato starch
(15g)

75g (6
Tb)
No
sugar

5
b
5
c

Potato starch
(15g)
Potato starch
(15g)

25g
(2 Tb)
75g (6
Tb)

6
a

Millet (15g)

No
sugar

6
b
6
c

Millet (15g)

25g
(2 Tb)
75g (6
Tb)

Millet (15g)

Table 4.2
Rate: Thickness 9 (thickest) 1 (thinnest); Transparent 9(most transparent) 1 (opaque); Consistency 9 (most
consistent) 1 (least consistent)
N Thickening
Additi Gelat Thic
Transp
Consistency
Comments
o. Agent
on
inizkness arency
ation
As
After
Cooke freezing
Tem
d
p
7 Soy Flour (15g) No
a
sugar
7
b

Soy Flour (15g)

25g
(2 Tb)

7
c
8
a

Soy Flour (15g)

Sweet Rice
Flour (15g)

75g (6
Tb)
No
sugar

8
b

Sweet Rice
Flour (15g)

25g
(2 Tb)

8
c

Sweet Rice
Flour (15g)

75g (6
Tb)
21

9
a

Oat Flour (15g)

No
sugar

9
b

Oat Flour (15g)

25g
(2 Tb)

9
c
1
0
a
1
0
b
1
0
c
1
1
a
1
1
b
1
1
c

Oat Flour (15g)

Buckwheat
Flour (15g)

75g (6
Tb)
No
sugar

Buckwheat
Flour (15g)

25g
(2 Tb)

Buckwheat
Flour (15g)

75g (6
Tb)

Semolina Flour
(15g)

No
sugar

Semolina Flour
(15g)

25g
(2 Tb)

Semolina Flour
(15g)

75g (6
Tb)

Discussion
Starch is a paste used as a thickening agent. The structure of starch in contributed to the
polysaccharides, amylose and amylopectin. The combination and level of content of the two are
what give the starch its unique properties. The three main sources of starch are cereals, roots,
and tubers (Batten, 2014). In this experimental foods lab, we compared the thickening power of
eleven various starches, including corn starch, flour, barley flour, tapioca, potato starch, dark rye
flour, soy flour, sweet rice flour, oat flour, buckwheat flour, and semolina flour. In each starch
we observed and documented the thickness, transparency and consistency of the various starches.
The structure of amylose is what contributes to swelling and allows for the starch to
gelatinize. Gelatinization is achieved when the starch is heated with water to cause a physical
change and increase the thickening ability of the starch. The starches that were most translucent
through observations in lab were the cornstarch, tapioca and rice. As seen in Table 4.1, Corn
Starch (1a-1-c) and Tapioca (4a-4c) had transparency ratings of 9-8 in being the most
22

transparent. In Table 4.2 Sweet Rice Flour (8a-8c) had transparency ratings of 7-8 in being
transparent.
The starches that gelatinize at 95 1000C are both seen on table 4.2. Oat flour (9a-9c) in
all three experimentations with different grams of sugar added pasted at 100.1 degrees Celsius
and buckwheat flour (10a-10c) pasted at 97.5 degrees Celsius in the third experimentation when
75g of sugar were added. Sugar delays the viscosity of gelatinization because it competes for
water with starch molecules. This competition explains the fact that gelatinization is delayed
and the final temperature required to achieve gelatinization is raised as the level of sugar in a
starch mixture is increased (McWilliams, 2012, p.177). Seen with most thickening agents, but
particularly visible in our thickening agent, Oat Flour (9a-9c). When no sugar was added the
pasting temperature was 97.6 degrees Celsius, then when 25grams of sugar was added pasting
was seen at 98.4 degrees Celsius. The last addition of sugar at 75gram was 100.1 degrees
Celsius.
The starches that have the smoothest consistency are semolina flour and cornstarch as
seen with the highest ratings of 8-9 in being most consistent. The conclusion made about
amylose versus amylopectin in the various starches is that in general root and tuber starches
contain somewhat less amylose than do the cereal starches. Therefore, cornstarch and rice flour
contain the greatest gel strength, which correlates to quantity of amylose. (McWilliams, 2012,
table 9.5).

23

Lab 5: Fiber
October 3, 2014
Lab Conditions: Hot and humid.
Purpose
The purpose of todays lab was to observe the changes in appearance, texture and flavor of a
baked good when various types of fiber were used in the process.
Experimental Procedures
The class was either assigned to make chocolate chip cookies or medium-size muffins. The lab
instructor assigned each group a mystery fiber. She assigned my lab partner and I to make
medium sized muffins using Fiber L, Muffin 374. The baking time of our muffins was 23 min.
The cooking method for the muffins were as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Pre-heat oven to 375F

Butter muffin tins.
Sift the flour.
In a bowl, beat the eggs, milk, and oil with a wire whisk for 2 minutes by hand.
Add salt, sugar, flour, and baking powder to the bowl and combine with a spatula or
wooden spoon until just mixed (the batter will not be smooth).
Pour dough equally into 6 muffin cups.
Bake for about 20 minutes or until the top gets golden brown.
Remove muffins from the oven and place the baking tin/muffins on a cooling rack.
Record baking time.

The cooking method for the chocolate chip cookies is as follows:

Cooking Method:
1. Pre-heat oven to 375F
2. Sift the flour.
3. In a bowl, place butter, sugar, egg, baking soda, salt, and vanilla. Mix together with a
hand mixer for 2 minutes on medium speed.
4. Add flour slowly into bowl and mix with a hand mixer until combined.
5. Use the scale and measure the dough, then divide it into 6 equal portions.
6. Line a baking pan with parchment paper.
7. Place the cookies on the baking pan.
8. Bake for about 8 minutes or until the cookies turn golden brown.
9. Remove cookies from the oven and place the baking sheet/cookies on a cooling rack.
10. Record baking time.
24

Results
Table 5.1
Cooking
Time

Appearance

Texture

Flavor

353 13 min

biscuit- like,
Husky look in
cookie.

Grainy, dry

bland,
sweet hints

923 14 min

smooth top , golden crunchy, gooey

brown
center

buttery, sweet, little spice ,

butterscotch

293 10.5 min

air pockets, flat

grainy

crunchy side,
moist middle
chewy

chocolate-like, buttery

576 16 min

white(light color),
bulky , thick

Rice-like, grainy

Rice-like, not sweet, dry

346 14min

round, tan

moist, grainy

dry, not sweet, flour-like

948 13.5 min

light golden color

easily dissolves in Bland, wheat like, slightly

mouth, powdery
buttery

583 24 min

white , grains of
husk in them

moist, doughy,
airy

light sweetness, bland

374 23min

light brown

coconut, crunchy
top

Super sweet!, cornbread-like

183 17min

Brown & toasty,

white inside

moist, crunchy
outside, spongy
inside

Bitter, too much salt.

658 25min

biscuit, grainy top,

airy

769 20min

White, brown side,

crunchy top

Cookies

Muffins

Bland, hint of sweet

crunchy inside,
airy, moist

Just like a biscuit missing

honey. Bland (lack of flavor) at
end very sweet.

25

Discussion
There are two main types of fiber, soluble and insoluble fiber. Some of the soluble fiber
is digested and helps the body bind serum cholesterol. Insoluble fiber is not digested and
contributes to decreasing transit time of food on the GI tract, as well as adds bulk to stool
(Batten, 2014). In lab, we noted the change in appearance, texture and flavor to a baked good
when different types of fiber were used. The mystery fibers that were added to the cookies and
muffins were flaxseed meal, inulin, dextrin, psyllium husk, oat bran and ground oatmeal.
The best flavor for both muffins and cookies was the addition of the inulin fiber, which
happened to be our mystery fiber in making muffins. In table 5.1 this is Cookie 923 and Muffin
374. The taste in the muffin was extremely sweet and somewhat reminded me of cornbread, but
the texture was too crumbly to be considered a muffin. It did have a crunchy top, but there was
not much structure to give it a structured muffin hold on its own. The best texture for muffin was
oat bran, which was Muffin 769. It had a firm bite and the inside was airy and moist. Although,
the flavor was very bland it did have a hint of sweetness at the end. The cookie that had the best
flavor and texture was Cookie 923, which was the fiber inulin. Inulin's sweetness can be
attributed to the to its structure. Inulin is a fructose polymer linked by beta 1-2 linkages, and with
a glucose unit at the end (McWilliams, 2012, p.305). Fructose is the sugar with the greatest
sweetness and explains the sweet taste of the muffin and cookie. Interestingly, in class we
discussed that fructose actually loses its sweetness in high temperatures, but I did not taste that in
the cookies or muffin.
In conclusion, the fiber that would be the best addition to muffins or cookies to maintain
good quality would be inulin. Inulin not only tasted the best in the cookies and muffins, but it has
beneficial properties as a prebiotic fiber and also promotes calcium absorption. In the large

26

intestine beneficial acidophilus and bifidus bacteria digest inulin to produce a more acidic
environment, which is unfavorable to pathogenic bacterial growth and survival (McWilliams,
2012, p.305)
The only guess I made was that that dextrin, which was Muffin 183 and Cookie 293, was
going to be the sweetest tasting because of its glucose components. To my surprise it was
actually the one thing that tasted the worst. As Muffin 182 it had a fishy aftertaste and was very
bitter, but as Cookie 293 it was chocolate and buttery in flavor. So, somehow I was 50% correct.
An error I noticed was that with the chocolate chip cookies we were not really able to
taste the fiber as well as in the muffins. This is because the sweetness of the chocolate chip
cookies sometimes overruled over the taste of the fiber. This is a definite bias when it comes to
tasting the cookies. I think next time it would be a better option to not put chocolate chips in
them for a more accurate testing.
Fiber is a great ingredient to put into a bake good to increase the benefits of a pastry,
which would usually not have many health benefits. For example, a soluble fiber found in oats,
beta-glucan, and gum from psyllium seed husk has been shown to effectively reduce cholesterol
levels (McWilliams, 2012, p.203). Unfortunately, as seen in Table 5.1 Cookie 576 and Muffin
658 were not the best in flavor or texture. Cookie 576 was too dry and grainy and Muffin 658
was too bland and dry. This experiment was able to show us that the fibers need to be chosen
wisely depending on the type of flavor, texture and appearance one wants in a final product.
Although, it also shows that this is one way of eating a sweet and incorporating health benefits.

27

Lab 6: Fats and Oils

October 10, 2014
Lab Conditions: Normal
Purpose
The purpose of the fats and oils lab was to evaluate the color, flavor and tenderness of a pastry
when variations were made in the types of fats and flours used in the recipe.
Experimental Procedures
Today the specific pastry that we were instructed to make was piecrust. Our variation was to
substitute all-purpose flour with oat flour. In the control, the type of fat that was used was
shortening. The recipe is as follows:
Pastry Recipe
C. Oat Flour
C. Shortening
2 T. cold water
t. salt
1. Preheat oven to 425 degrees
2. Add salt to flour and stir to combine well
3. Add fat all at one time; use a pastry blender or two knives to cut the fat into the flour
until the size of uncooked rice granules
4. Sprinkle the water over the surface one drop at a time while flipping the mixture
upward with a 4-tined fork.
5. Mash the dough together with the fork to form a ball, approximately 10 strokes
6. Turn dough onto a 12 long piece of wax paper; manipulate to form a more cohesive
ball; flatten
7. Place a 12 long piece of wax paper on top of the flattened ball; roll out with a rolling
pin into a oblong piece
8. Cut into strips approximately 2 X 3; bake in a 425 F oven until light golden brown
9. Note the total baking time required. Our baking time was 14 minutes.

28

Results
Table 6.1
Pastry
Variation

Cooking
time

Color

Flavor

Tenderness: Rank 1-10; 1

least tender, 10 most tender

1a. Shortening

15 min.

Extremely
white

Cracker, bland,
no flavor

1 (little flaky)

1b. Lard

9 min.

Light brown

n/a

6.5

1c. Margarine,
stick

5 min.

Tan

Salty , cracker
like

1d. Butter

13 min.

Tan

Butter!!

1e. Vegetable oil

(not used)

n/a

n/a

1f. Soft tub

margarine

14 min.

white- golden
tan

Salty/ buttery

1g. Reduced fat

margarine

15 min.

yellow-white

Dry, buttery!
Flat-bread like

2/3

2a. Whole wheat

flour

18 min.

Golden
Brown

Wheat, cracker
like, grainy

3/4

2b. Bread flour

12 min.

Whitebrownish

Buttery
cookie**

5 ( soft flaky)

2c. Cake flour

14 min.

White /
Brown sides

Buttery, good
for crust

2d. Oat flour

14 min.

Light brown

Sandy, gritty,
bitter

10

2e. Soy flour

(not used)

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

6
(Perfect look)
5 (flaky, moist)
n/a

n/a

Discussion
Fats and oils are an extremely important part of cooking because they contribute to a
numerous amount of functional roles in products. Some examples of their contributions include,
color, flavor, texture, emulsification, cooking medium, tenderness and shortening power
(McWilliams, 2012, p. 267). In, this experimental food lab we were to observe the fats capability

29

to achieve optimal tenderness in a piecrust. The evaluation of color, flavor and tenderness were
taken into consideration when variations were made in either the types of fat or flour used in the
recipe.
The tenderness of a product depends on the shortening power. An example of tenderness
would be in the making of the piecrust. When the fat is added to the flour, water molecules
cannot interact, thus fat prevent the interaction of water (Batten, 2014). The shortening power of
a product has to do with how fat coats large surface to prevent contact between water and gluten
in baked goods when mixing batters (McWilliams, 2012, p. 268). Mixing the batter contributes
to cutting the gluten strands. Shortening power contributes to plasticity, which is the ability of a
fat to be spread. An example of plasticity would be the ability of oil to coat more of the gluten.
Compared to olive oil butter has greater plasticity and this contributes to it being able to surround
most flour (Batten, 2014). This is why butter is a better product for piecrust because it
contributes to giving the crust a flaky texture.
In the evaluation of Table 6.1 we tested different fats in pastry to evaluate for flakiness.
The fat that displayed the best shortening power and therefore yielded the tenderest product was
butter (1d). This has to do with that butter is mostly fat at 80% and 16.5% water content. The
worst fat substitute was shortening (1a) because that has a 100% fat ratio (McWilliams, 2012, p.
266).
In Table 6.1 our evaluation of the different flours were very broad ranges of results. The
whole wheat (2a) had a weird taste and was very grainy and cracker -like tenderness. The color
was also too dark and might affect the end product in way that someone might not want. The
bread flour (2b) had the best taste and tenderness. It was flaky and had a good color. The cake
flour (2c) had a good taste, but the crust was not flaky and the color was a little too white. Oat

30

flour (2d) was the worst flour to use in a piecrust. This will be discussed more in detail further
on. The last flour was our control, all-purpose flour (1a). It had a bland taste, but for a crust it
might be ok. The best pick for making pie crust would be bread flour.
In our experiment we were able to see the difference in using oat flour from all purpose
flour. In table 6.1 oat flour (2d) was our specific flour. For example, the color was a light brown
and when making piecrust one does not want to have such a brown pie crust because it is not as
appealing. It tasted chalky and somewhat like dirt, which is not acceptable at all. The tenderness
was rated a nine out of 10, with 1 being least tender and 10 being most tender. The pastry
crumbled to the touch and there was absolutely no flakiness, which is something wanted for in a
piecrust. Overall, this flour would not be a good substitute.
In conclusion, the difference in flours and fats can make a very different effect in a
recipe. The process of substituting ingredients can be done, but when experimented with. Also,
considering that some substitutions were healthier than others, such as reduced fat margarine for
butter, the taste did not justify it. Butter as the type of fat was undoubtedly the best in creating a
flaky texture, perfect golden color and flavorful piecrust. As for the flours, the bread flour is the
best option because it tasted better than all-purpose, had some flakiness and a balanced light
brown color. There comes a time when taste cancels out the healthier option in certain situations,
especially when it comes to pie.

31

Lab 7: Milk Proteins

October 24, 2014
Laboratory Conditions: Normal
Purpose
The purpose of the milk proteins lab was to evaluate the volume, flavor and tenderness of ricotta
cheese and cottage cheese when different variations of milks are used in the process. As well as
observe the effect of renin and acid in the making of these cheeses.
Experimental Procedures
In this experimental food lab groups were assigned to make either cottage cheese or ricotta
cheese using different variations of milk. My partner and I were assigned to make cottage cheese
using the variation of soymilk. The following are the procedures for both the cottage cheese
formula and ricotta cheese formula that were to be evaluated.
Basic Cottage Cheese Formula
Milk
2 cups
Rennet
1 Tablet
Dissolve rennet in 1 tablespoon of lukewarm water while milk is being heated to 370C. Add
dissolved rennet and let stand 1 hour. Use a knife to slice curd into inch cubes. Reheat to
370C and maintain that temperature until whey separates. Carefully transfer the clotted mixture
to a sieve lined with a double layer of cheesecloth. Collect the whey in a bowl below. Measure
the volume of whey in a graduated cylinder. Place the curd on a serving dish for evaluation.
(Optional: If desired salt may be added to the curd for flavor)
Variations used in lab included:
1. Whole milk
2. 2% milk
3. Non-fat milk
4. Soymilk
Basic Ricotta Cheese Formula
Milk
2 cups
White vinegar
1 Tablespoon
Heat the milk in non-reactive pot on medium heat, stirring occasionally until tiny bubbles start
appearing on the milk and temperature is about 830C. It will be close to boiling. When
temperature is reached, remove from heat, add vinegar, and stir gently for 1 minute. Curds will
start to form immediately.
32

Line a colander with a double layer of cheesecloth and place over a large bowl or sink.
Remove the pan from heat and gently ladle curds into the prepared sieve. Pull up on the sides of
the cheesecloth to drain off any extra liquid, but do NOT press on the curds. Gather the edges of
the cloth, tie into a ball with string, and allow to drain for at least 15 minutes.
Variations used in lab included:
1. Whole milk
2. 2% milk
3. Non-fat milk
4. Soymilk
Results
Table 7.1: Cottage Cheese Evaluation
Type of Milk

Whey

Volume

Curd

Flavor

Flavor

Tenderness

364 mL

n/a

Bland

Smooth, apparent curdles. Very moist.

353 mL

n/a

Bland

Firm. Moist.

c. Non-fat milk 376 mL

n/a

Bland/Tofu Firm, bouncy, moist not curdled enough.

a. Whole milk
b. 2% milk

d. Soymilk

Did not set n/a

n/a

n/a

Table 7.2: Ricotta Evaluation

Type of Whey / Milk

Flavor

Tenderness

e. Whole milk

Bland

Best texture! Perfect. Moist. Intact and structured.

f. 2% milk

Bland

Firm/chewy. Extremely Dry. Parmesan Cheese

appearance.

g. Non-fat milk

Tangy

Firm/chewy. Semi-dry. Bouncy.

h. Soymilk

Slightly
bitter

Very soft.

Discussion
The process of making cheese from milk is attributed to the components of its two
primary protein components. Milk protein is composed of 80 % casein and 20% whey. Casein is
not heat sensitive, but whey is extremely heat sensitive. There are different types of casein

33

proteins and a combination of two, alpha and kappa casein, together make a casein micelle. The
rennin enzyme acts on the casein proteins of milk by destroying kappa casein and causing a
curdling effect from the alpha casein protein in the milk. The addition of an acid is also a way to
create coagulation in the milk. Coagulation involves a denaturation of the milk protein causing a
structural change from the proteins third structure to secondary structure via hydrogen bonding
and increasing the viscosity into solid. Therefore, there is also a conversion from sol state to gel
state (McWilliams, 2013, p. 288)
In the evaluation of Table 7.1 in the making of cottage cheese the enzyme, rennet, was
used to curdle the milk protein into the cheese. The precaution that needs to be taken in making
cottage cheese with rennin is to be aware of the temperature. If the temperature goes above the
temperature desired the cheese would become too tough and hard (Waller, 1912, p.20). In the
process of making the cottage cheese the curd is cut in order to release the whey from the curds
to eventually drain it away. The whey is ultimately a byproduct of the cottage cheese making.
The whey protein precipitates out of the mixture at 150 degrees fahrenheit. There are
many nutrients found in the whey from rennin-coagulated milk, such as minerals, lactose and
some water-soluble vitamins. Some of the uses for whey include using it in baked products,
meat, sauces, dips in order to give structure to gels, help bind water and/or promote browning. It
contributes to viscosity and stability of food products. It is also a healthier alternative to
replacing carbohydrate gums and starches because it contributes less calories and has a desirable
amount of protein content (Mc Williams, 2013, p.213).
In Table 7.1, the whole milk (a) was the best to make cottage cheese because the
tenderness was smooth and there was a fair amount of apparent curdles. It was also moist
enough, but not too dry. There was clearly a difference in the tenderness of the whole milk

34

cottage cheese and nonfat milk cottage cheese. The whole milk cottage cheese appeared more
desirable to consume.
I would not be able to say first hand if the fat content had any effect on the flavor because
I did not try any of the samples because of dietary restrictions. Although, the flavor compounds
in cheese are primarily derived from carbohydrate (mainly lactose), citrate, protein (mainly
casein) and milk fat as a result of glycolysis, citrate fermentation, proteolysis and lipolysis by
microorganisms (Holland, 2005). Since fat is a contributor to taste in products I would assume
that the higher content of fat increases flavor.
Our experiment was to use soymilk in the attempt to make cottage cheese. The use of
soymilk and the interaction of rennet did cause coagulation. The lab instructor instructed us to
not cut the cheese in order to allow the soymilk to try to coagulate. This error could be because
of the different structure of soymilk to cow's milk. Soymilk made from ground, soaked soybeans
and contains no saturated fat or cholesterol. Although, protein is comparable to cows milk
though. (Edelstein, 2013, p. 242) Therefore, there are structure differences from the source it
comes from and that could be a contribution to no coagulation from soymilk.
In the evaluation of Table 7.2 in the making of ricotta cheese this differs from the way
cottage cheese is made in the use of acid instead of rennet to coagulate the milk protein. Ricotta
has more uniformity in appearance and texture and cottage cheese has more apparent curd
formation. Again, I did not taste the samples, so I could not say much about the flavor other than
what I was told. It seemed that the whole milk (e) and 2% milk (f) had a very bland flavor, but
soy milk (h) and non-fat milk (g) had more of a tangy and bitter flavor to them. The preparation
of both cheeses seemed to be somewhat the same except for that the ricotta cheese made from
the whey versus cottage cheese expels the whey from its final substance. The absence of whey is

35

due to the fact that the ricotta cheese is not cut and there is no pressure put on it. This explains
the increase in water content and apparent moisture of the ricotta cheese.
The milk that made the best ricotta cheese was whole milk (Table7.2, e) because of the
texture and appearance. It was the ricotta cheese that was the most uniformly together, thick, and
there was a thicker structure to it. The ricotta cheeses made from other milks were little pieces of
curds and not much uniformity in the structure. Even though, the samples were thick they were
easily separated.
The making of cheese is an interesting process because it is highlighting the proteins
weakness of denaturation to the advantage of making another product. This was a pleasant way
to end experimental food studies labs because my family in their home country makes cheese for
a living and I was able to partake in the cheese making over the summer. I now understand the
process of the chemical reactions of the proteins with the rennet enzyme and acid and their roles
to achieve our final product. This is something that I thoroughly enjoyed partaking in inside the
lab and in my home country over the summer.

36

References:
Batten, C. (RDN Lecturer) (2014). DFM 357: Experimental Food Study.
Lecture conducted from, San Francisco State University.

Brown, A. (2010). Candy. In Understanding Food: Principles and preparation. Stamford, CT:
Cengage Learning.

Drewnowski, A. (1997). Taste preferences and food intake. Annual Review of Nutrition, 17(1),
237-253.

Edelstein, S. (2013). Milk and Dairy Products; Sugar and Sugar Substitutes. In Food science: An
ecological approach. Jones And Bartlett.

Gisslen, W. (2010). Chapter 5: Menus, Recipes and Cost Management. In Professional Cooking
(7th ed., pp. 105-107). John Wiley & Sons.

Holland, R. , Liu, S. , Crow, V. , Delabre, M. , Lubbers, M. , et al. (2005). Esterases of lactic acid
bacteria and cheese flavour: Milk fat hydrolysis, alcoholysis and esterification.
International Dairy Journal, 15(6-9), 711-718.

McWilliams, M. (2012). Food Experimental Perspectives (7th ed.). Prentice Hall.

37

Waller, L. (1912). CHEESE AND ITS ECONOMICAL USES IN THE DIET. In Experiment
station work, LXVII: Screening cabbage seed beds, experiments in beef production,
spraying apple orchards, preparation of choice hams, new type of spray nozzle, factors
affecting fat in cream, preparation of corn for hogs(Issues 476-500 ed.). Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Wittenberg, M. (2007). Sweeteners. In New good food: Essential ingredients for cooking and
eating well(p. 242-243). Berkeley, Calif.: Ten Speed Press.

38