Mulika and Siskin wheat trials

Continuing the trials of the wheat from Harvest 2021 at Green Acres Farm I have tested Mulika and Siskin using a consistent bake to compare the two wheats. They were mixed at the same hydration, with the same amountof dough development, proof and baking.

Mulika and siskin loaves
Julia and siskin loaves sliced

Both doughs were made with

500g sifted stoneground flour
5g instant (easy bake) yeast
7g fine salt

They were initially mixed with 340g fo water. The siskin was adequately hydrated with this amount but the Mulika was still very dry.

I added another 20g to each dough to keep the bake consistent. This made the Mulika dough into a more suitable consistency. The siskin was quite sticky at this hydration. If I wasn’t baking the two doughs on a consistent basis for comparison purposes I would have kept the siskin at the original hydration. I would also have been tempted to add an extra 10g of water to the Mulika. These two doughs are a good example of how different single variety wheats can be.

The Mulika lacked extensibility at first, breaking easily during the first round of stretch and fold. The extensibility of the dough improved when the flour became fully hydrated and the gluten strength was developed. By the third stretch and fold the Mulika had a good balance of extensibility and elasticity. It shaped well into a smooth loaf. Proof took 30 minutes at 20C.

The siskin remained sticky throughout the dough development. It was a very extensible dough with little elasticity. It didn’t rise as high as the Mulika after the 30 minutes proofing time but it did have good oven spring.

I have lost my sense of taste and smell as a result of covid so I had to ask my daughter to do the taste test. The Mulika was a big hit, with a lovely wheat taste and was her preferred choice of the two. The Siskin has a milder taste with a slight nuttiness.

Mulika has been bred from Paragon. It is a spring wheat and this year’s lab results show a protein content of 12.47% and a Hagberg falling number of 255.

Siskin is a modern wheat that has been grown at Green Acres at part of a network of trials to assess the performance of these modern wheats in organic farming practices.

3 thoughts on “Mulika and Siskin wheat trials”

  1. Hi, Pleased I’ve found your site. I would expect Mulika to bake best as it is a group 1 milling wheat where as Siskin is only a group 2. Thanks for putting the spec of Mukila, it does show that its 0.5% protein and a little lower on Hagberg than conventionally would be regarded as ideal.

    1. Hi I am glad you have found me too. Absolutely, but it is surprising how well these wheats can bake when they are given the chance even when the spec tells you they shouldn’t.

  2. Hi Kath. I’m so sorry you lost your sense of taste. I do hope that returns soon.

    This post is of immense value to me as I buy from the local watermill and the miller is always able to tell me the variety of wheat. (I mill my own wheat bought from him and others.)

    I have always been disappointed with the taste of Paragon and find the wheat I get from various landraces around the country massively superior. Worth the cost of them producing more extensible doughs which I correct with broad bean flour and slightly lower hydration.

    Mulika certainly looks like being worth a trial.

    I’m glad I’ve found your blog it’s superb. Thank you 🙂

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: