Cardamom

Green & Black Cardamom

Photo Credit: Robin (FotoosVanRobin/Flickr)

Cardamom is the third most expensive spice by weight, behind only saffron and vanilla. But with a captivatingly complex flavor profile crammed into such a small package, there’s little mystery behind its steep price. This spice delivers a pungent taste that’s smokey, yet contains hints of coolness reminiscent of mint and lemon, packed inside the tiny black seeds of the small cardamom seed pod. The cardamom genera belong in the ginger family, Zingiberaceae. True cardamom, also known as green cardamom, falls within the genus Elettaria and is grown in India and Malaysia. Black cardamom is of the genus Amomum and grown primarily in Asia and Australia.

While popular in foods and drinks, cardamom is equally admired in traditional medicine. Therapeutic uses range from antiseptic, expectorant, stimulant, and tonic [1]. Cardamom oil is especially known to help alleviate digestive system problems, working as a laxative, colic, stomachic, and diuretic [1]. Perhaps most interesting is its airway relaxant potential in the treatment of asthma [2]. Cardamom contains flavenoids, which exhibit bronchodilatory activity, essential to asthma relief by relaxing constricted bronchial tubes [2]. Moreover, cardamom extracts were observed to relax carbachol- and potassium-induced contractions in tracheal tissues [2], effectively relieving bronchospasms in asthma attacks. Bronchospasms occur in instances of high levels of carbachol or potassium, which are able to cause tracheal tissue contractions by simultaneously opening L-type calcium channels and stimulating muscarinic receptors. Both calcium channels and muscarinic receptors regulate signals for smooth muscle thickening; carbachol and potassium interaction with these signaling pathways leads to airway constrictions. In the study, cardamom showed inhibitory effects against carbachol and potassium, enabling relaxation of the contracted tissues.

Whether the ailment is asthma, digestive problems, or simply thirst, cardamom is all the more reason to enjoy a spicy cup of masala chai.

References cited

  1. “Cardamom Essential Oil (a.k.a. Cardomon Essential Oil) Information.”Cardamom Oil (Elettaria Cardamomum). N.p., 29 May 2014.
  2. Khan A, Khan Q, Gilani A. Pharmacological Basis for the Medicinal Use of Cardamom in Asthma. Bangladesh Journal of Pharmacology. June 2011;6(1):34-37.

Alice PhungAbout the author: Alice Phung once had her sights set on an English degree, but eventually switched over to chemistry and hasn’t looked back since.

Read more by Alice Phung


Veggie Microbes & Soil Microbes

You call it salad. The bacteria call it home.

Microbes–they’re everywhere! While scientists at the University of Colorado take an inventory of the microorganisms that live on the fruits and vegetables we eat, soil scientists are discovering the link between microorganisms that live in the soil and human health.
Read more

Anyone Can Be a Kitchen Scientist

If anyone can cook, then anyone can do science! (Photo credit: Pixar)

If anyone can cook, then anyone can do science! (Photo credit: Pixar)

“Anyone can cook!” declared Chef Auguste Gusteau in the classic animated film Ratatouille. We’ll go a step further: with a little cooking know-how and access to a kitchen anyone can do science. Each spring the students of the Science & Food undergraduate course prove us right as they research and experiment their way toward apple pie enlightenment.

But you don’t have to be a student in our course to be a savvy kitchen scientist. One of our younger readers, Vincent, recently won his local seventh grade science fair by carefully crafting and conducting his own kitchen experiment. By baking cookies with different temperatures of light (reduced fat) butter, Vincent determined that frozen butter creates a chewier cookie than melted butter. His scientifically proven chewy chocolate chip cookie recipe appears at the end of the article.

Vincent’s project is a great example of a successful kitchen experiment. For those of you who are avid kitchen experimenters or are thinking of dipping a toe into the world of kitchen science, we’ve summarized the key features of Vincent’s project that will help make any (kitchen) science experiment a success.

Vincent’s winning science fair project.

Vincent’s winning science fair project.

A close-up of Vincent’s project. Note the number of cookies baked for each butter condition.

A close-up of Vincent’s project. Note the number of cookies baked for each butter condition.

Keys to a successful (kitchen) experiment

A questionScientific research has to start somewhere, and it almost always starts with a thought-provoking question. Why is the sky blue? Why do apples fall from trees? In this case Vincent wanted to know how the temperature of butter affects the chewiness of chocolate chip cookies.

A testable hypothesis – Once researchers have a question in mind, they need to come up with a testable hypothesis. The key word here is testable. Having a testable hypothesis guides researchers as they design effective experimental procedures. Based on a bit of background research and a dash of reasoning, Vincent hypothesized that cookie chewiness would be directly proportional to the temperature of the butter (hotter butter = chewier cookie). Vincent knew he could directly test his hypothesis by baking cookies with different butter temperatures and having a panel of tasters rate the chewiness of each cookie.

A carefully controlled experiment – When designing an experiment, it’s crucial to only change one variable, or component, at a time. Vincent was careful to only test one factor—butter temperature—and keep everything else in the experiment constant.

A large enough sample sizeOnce you’ve perfected your experimental design, repeat, repeat, repeat! Mistakes happen. And even the most thoughtfully executed experiments can go haywire because of factors beyond our control. Ovens have hot spots. Humidity can change the moisture of dough. To help avoid these potential pitfalls, Vincent made eight cookies at each butter temperature and had five different taste-testers rate the cookies.

A thoughtful analysis of the results – At the end of it all, what good is a bunch of data if it doesn’t actually mean anything useful? Based on his taste test, Vincent found that frozen butter produced the chewiest cookies, the exact opposite of his hypothesis! Like a true scientist, Vincent discounted his original hypothesis and offered up some pretty insightful ideas to explain his observations:

“The cookies with melted light butter were the least chewy, almost crunchy. I think this happened because, since there was more moisture in the batter with the melted butter, the cookies spread out more and got flat, exposing more surface area. This caused more water to evaporate quickly.”

A follow-up experimentThe work of a scientist is never done. Answering one question inevitably opens the doors to many more. As for Vincent, he’ll likely be back in the kitchen repeating his experiment with regular butter instead of light butter. “Doing this again,” he wrote in his report, “would not be a problem at all since I love baking and eating cookies!”

Do you experiment in the kitchen?
Write to us at scienceandfooducla (at) gmail (dot) com and tell us about your best kitchen experiment. We’ll feature our favorite feats of kitchen science on the site!

 

Vincent’s Scientifically-Tested Chewy Chocolate Chip Cookies
Adapted from Mel’s Kitchen Café

Ingredients

1 cup light butter, frozen and cut into cubes
1 cup granulated sugar
1 cup packed light brown sugar
3 large eggs
1 teaspoon salt
1 teaspoon vanilla
1 1/2 teaspoons baking soda
3 1/2 cups flour
2 cups chocolate chips


Directions

Preheat oven to 350 degrees. Cream butter and both sugars together until well mixed. Add eggs and mix for 2-3 minutes, until the batter is light in color. Add salt, vanilla, baking soda and mix. Add flour and chocolate chips together and mix until combined.

Drop cookie batter by rounded tablespoon onto parchment paper or silpat lined baking sheets and bake for 10 minutes until lightly golden around edges but still soft in the center.

 


Liz Roth-JohnsonAbout the author: Liz Roth-Johnson earned her Ph.D. in Molecular Biology at UCLA. If she’s not in the lab, you can usually find her experimenting in the kitchen.

Read more by Liz Roth-Johnson


Harnessing Creativity & The Science of Pie (Event Recap)

On your mark…
Get set…
GO!

As the doors swung open, guests eagerly awaiting the final Science & Food lecture series were transported to a place nothing short of a Pie-Palooza. Twenty student teams stood confidently next to their baked confection and explained to the judges how they employed the scientific method to creatively reimagine the art of baking the perfect pie. Some developed aqueous solutions to modify the flakiness of their pie crusts while others sought to improve filling texture by altering pH levels and used techniques such as microscopy to measure their results. Whatever their approach, the students proved that a little bit of science goes a long way in mastering the craft of pie baking.

Dr. Paul Barber (Associate Professor, UCLA) and Dave Arnold carefully evaluate the students pie presentations

Dr. Paul Barber (Associate Professor, UCLA) and Dave Arnold carefully evaluate the student pie presentations

Special guest judges, Nicole Rucker of Gjelina Take Away and food critic, Jonathan Gold

Nicole Rucker (Pastry Chef, Gjelina Take Away) and Jonathan Gold (Food Critic, LA Times) partner up as special guest judges


Lena Kwak and Dr. Rachelle Crosbie-Watson (Associate Professor, UCLA) take a closer look at student posters

Lena Kwak and Dr. Rachelle Crosbie-Watson (Associate Professor, UCLA) take a closer look at student posters

After the large-scale pie tasting, guest speakers, Lena Kwak and Dave Arnold, took the stage to share their insight on innovation in the culinary laboratory and emphasized how unforeseen mishaps often lead to novel discoveries. Co-Founder and President of Cup4Cup, Kwak discussed how her breakthrough formulation of gluten-free flour was a by-product of her fearlessness to try new techniques and make mistakes in the kitchen. Founder of the Museum of Food and Drink (MOFAD) and Owner of Booker & Dax, Arnold described how curiosity and relentless dedication to experimentation led to the development of many of his out-of-the-box culinary gadgets. Case in point: the Searzall, one of his latest inventions designed for hand-held blowtorches to evenly apply high temperature heat to sear foods while avoiding the remnants of unpleasant aromatics. He also invoked the audience to participate in an experiment where he challenged everyone to digest gymnemic acid, which dulls our sensory perception of sweetness. This exercise was designed to help guests unlock and appreciate the other factors (such as texture) that contribute to our understanding of taste.

Kwak addresses the audience's questions and reveals some of ingredients in her gluten-free flour

Kwak addresses the audience’s questions and reveals some of ingredients in her gluten-free flour


Dave Arnold explains his investigative process to developing his newest product, Searzall

Arnold explains and demonstrates the evolutionary process involved in developing the Searzall


Gymnemic acid, a sweetness inhibitor, made this bag of sweets taste completely bland!

Gymnemic acid, a sweetness inhibitor, made this bag of sweets taste completely bland

Finally, the panel of special guest judges shared with the audience their favorite pies from the student entries and awarded the students with prizes for the “Most Creative Pie”, “Most Qualified to Enter a Real Pie Contest”, “Best Scientific Pie”, “The People’s Choice Pie”, and “Best Overall Pie”.

Tom Folker and Eric Hirshfield-Yamanishi take home the "Most Qualified to Enter a Real Pie Contest" prize

Tom Folker and Eric Hirshfield-Yamanishi take home the “Most Qualified to Enter a Real Pie Contest” prize

Folker and Hirshfield-Yamanishi explored the effect alcohol, specifically Fireball whiskey, had on the overall flakiness of their pie crust and produced a pie the judges thought was worthy of a professional pie contest.

The "Most Creative Pie" went to Ying Zhi Lim and Jen So for their rosemary-infused deconstructed apple pie

The “Most Creative Pie” went to Ying Zhi Lim and Jen So for their imaginative apple pie

These creative young women, Lim and So, took the competition to the next level by presenting a deconstructed, rosemary-infused apple pie topped with a “reverse spherified” lemon zest cream cheese sauce to a create a harmoniously balanced and flavorful treat.

Christina Chung, Tori Schmitt, and Elliot Cheung impressed the judges and won the "Best Scientific Pie" award

Christina Chung, Tori Schmitt, and Elliot Cheung impressed the judges and won the “Best Scientific Pie” award

Chung, Schmitt, and Cheung added different combinations of liquids to generate their pie crust and recorded the amount of force required to alter the elasticity of the baked crust. Ultimately, the incorporation of beer into their pie crust recipe significantly altered texture as measured and quantified by the elastic modulus.

Apple Queens, Alina Naqvi and Ashley Upkins-Scott, stole the show and won both "The People's Choice Pie" and  "Best Overall Pie" prize

Apple Queens, Alina Naqvi and Ashley Upkins-Scott, stole the show and won both “The People’s Choice Pie” and “Best Overall Pie” prize

Naqvi and Upkins-Scott of team Apple Queens took different varieties of apples, including Granny Smith, Red Delicious, Pink Lady, and Fiji, to produce a crumble top pie that garnered praise from both the audience and the judges.

Congratulations to all the winners!

All photos were captured by Patrick Tran. For more images from the event, visit this photo album.


Anthony MartinAbout the author: Anthony Martin received his Ph.D. in Genetic, Cellular and Molecular Biology at USC and is self-publishing a cookbook of his favorite Filipino dishes.

Read more by Anthony Martin


Gluten Sensitivity & Gluten-Free Baking

glutenfreecookies

This week we’re all about gluten. NPR summarizes recent research on gluten sensitivity, while America’s Test Kitchen gives NPR the lowdown on gluten-free baking. Read more

Gluten Tolerance

540926535_6117cae4b9_z

photo credits (whatsername?/flickr)

It seems that people love to hate gluten. Though it plays an important role in baking, gluten has a bad reputation. The market for gluten-free foods and beverages reached $4.2 billion in 2012; an increase of 28% since 2008.[1] It is actually difficult to go into Whole Foods and find a baking mix with gluten. But gluten isn’t necessarily bad; it’s just misunderstood. Have a heart, and let’s learn to better appreciate gluten for the remarkable protein network that it is.

Gluten is comprised of two proteins; gliadin and glutenin, that are conjoined with starch in the endosperm of various grass-relatedgrains. Endosperms of flowering plants are stored with protein to nourish embryonic plants during germination.[2] True gluten is typically defined as coming only from certain members of the grass family, namely wheat, but gluten may arise from other cereal grains, like barley and rye, as they also contain protein composites of similar proteins. When water and flour mix, glutenin molecules cross-link with gliadin, and form a sub-microscopic gluten network. Stirring and kneading help gluten stretch and organize into a stronger network, turning simple paste into dough. If dough is leavened with yeast, the fermenting microbes produce carbon dioxide bubbles that are trapped within the gluten network and cause the dough to rise. Baking dehydrates the dough as the protein foam structure solidifies.

The development of gluten affects the texture of baked goods. Kneading promotes the formation of gluten strands and cross-links, creating baked products that are chewier the longer you knead the dough, such as pizza crust and bagels. Less developed gluten yields tender pastry products. For this reason, bread flours are high in gluten, while pastry flours have a lower gluten content. When a tender, flaky product is desired, like a pie crust, a fat such as shortening can be used to inhibit cross-link formation, along with less kneading and low moisture content.

photo credits (Andrea_Nguyen/flickr)

photo credits (Andrea_Nguyen/flickr)

Gluten intolerance has recently become a very talked-about condition. The most prominent form of intolerance occurs in people with Celiac disease. When people with this disease eat foods containing gluten, their immune system produces antibodies, which damage the intestinal lining, causing inflammation and nutrient malabsorption. The cause of the disease is currently unknown. Some gene mutations seem to increase risk of developing Celiac, but not everyone with the mutation is gluten intolerant. A study published in the American Journal of Gastroenterology states that the prevalence of Celiac disease in the US is 0.71%. [4] Recently, another potential form of intolerance called non-celiac gluten sensitivity has garnered attention. After consuming gluten, people with gluten sensitivity may experience diarrhea, fatigue and joint pain, but their intestines are not damaged as would be in the case of Celiac. In 2011, this condition was lent credibility by Peter Gibson, a professor of gastroenterology at Monash University and director of the GI Unit at The Alfred Hospital in Melbourne, Australia, who published a study that found gluten to cause gastrointestinal distress in patients without Celiac disease.[5] The experiment was one of the strongest pieces of evidence to date that non-celiac gluten sensitivity is a genuine condition. However, his study had not revealed why his subjects reacted adversely to gluten. He resolved to rigorously repeat the trial, ensuring that no confounding factors affected the results.

The study was conducted as follows: A total of 37 subjects, all meeting the criteria for having non-celiac gluten sensitivity were provided every meal for the entire study period. Any and all potential dietary triggers were removed, including lactose, certain preservatives, and fermentable, poorly absorbed short-chain carbohydrates, also known as FODMAPs. They were first fed a baseline diet low in FODMAPs for two weeks, then were given one of three diets (high gluten, low gluten, or placebo). Each subject cycled through each diet, and none ever knew what specific diet he or she was eating.

Regardless of which diet they were on, subjects reported similar degrees of worsened gastrointestinal ailments. Their reported pain, bloating, nausea, and gas all increased over the baseline diet. The data clearly indicated that a nocebo effect was occurring – in other words, participants were experiencing an entirely psychological phenomenon in which a harmless substance causes a harmful effect.

"A celiac looking in the window of a Parisian boulangerie." photo credits (justmakeit/flickr)

“A celiac looking in the window of a Parisian boulangerie.” photo credits (justmakeit/flickr)

So whether you eat gluten, cannot eat gluten, or choose to avoid it, it is a scientifically interesting substance that has spurred quite a bit of talk and research. Perhaps gluten is damages us psychologically more than it does health-wise. Despite the possibly nocebic effects of gluten, the booming popularity of gluten-free products has allowed people with Celiac a much greater range of food options, and has encouraged people to examine the ingredients of their foods more closely, though they may be avoiding the wrong substance.

Sources

1. “Gluten-Free Foods and Beverages in the U.S., 4th Edition.” : Market Research Report. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 May 2014.

2. Castro, By Joseph. “What Is Gluten?” LiveScience. TechMedia Network, 17 Sept. 2013. Web. 28 May 2014.

3. “Celiac Disease.” Web log post. Webmd.com. N.p., n.d. Web.Pomeroy, Ross. “Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity May Not Exist.” RealClearScience. N.p.,

4. Rubio-Tapia, A., JF Ludvigsson, TL Brantner, JL Murray, and JE Everheart. “The Prevalence of Celiac Disease in the United States.” National Center for Biotechnology Information. U.S. National Library of Medicine, n.d. Web. 25 May 2014.

5. Biesiekierski JR, Peters SL, Newnham ED, Rosella O, Muir JG, Gibson PR. “No effects of gluten in patients with self-reported non-celiac gluten sensitivity after dietary reduction of fermentable, poorly absorbed, short-chain carbohydrates.” Gastroenterology.


Elsbeth SitesAbout the author: Elsbeth Sites is pursuing her B.S. in Biology at UCLA. Her addiction to the Food Network has developed into a love of learning about the science behind food.

Read more by Elsbeth Sites