|WikiProject Food and drink||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject Chemistry||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
- 1 Are these possibly the same thing
- 2 like someone to make a diagram of the reaction
- 3 Role of humidity?
- 4 Milk Caramel
- 5 aspirin
- 6 examples?
- 7 Temperature
- 8 WRITE THE REACTION OUT or a partial one at the reaction sites
- 9 Comprehensibility
- 10 Sausage Image?
- 11 Acrylamide?
- 12 Dextrinisation is different
- 13 history, etc
- 14 inline citation strangeness
- 15 Type of Chemistry
- 16 Link to Flavoring is broken
- 17 Heterocyclic amine
- 18 Maillard Reaction in meat
- 19 Flawed mechanisms
- 20 But why is it delicious?
Are these possibly the same thing
there is an article called mallard reaction and this one called maillard reactions. Are these possibly the same thing?
- Yes. Now fixed. --Heron 11:51, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks, my fault. I am a pastry chef not a champion speller. --Rakista 17:26, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
- I thought that your spelling was just ducky. —188.8.131.52 16:24, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
like someone to make a diagram of the reaction
Sorry that I'm just a nerd, but I would really like someone to make a diagram of the reaction. I guess I just fondly remember my old O-Chem days. Unfortunately, as those days were over 20 years ago, I've lost it. Still, it seems to me that a beautiful and rather simple organic reacton like this should be mapped out. Could someone take the time to do it? Who knows, it may inspire a Jr. High or Highschooler to take an interest in chemistry. thanks so much,
Role of humidity?
This source contradicts a claim in the article, and says that humid environment promotes the reaction.  High temperature, high relative humidity, and alkaline conditions all promote the Maillard reaction. Can anyone explain? — Michael Fourman 11:53, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- Found a reference resolving contradiction - see article. — Michael Fourman 12:20, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
The article on Caramel states that milk caramel is in fact the result of Maillard reactions, in contradiction to the assertion in the article. Harold McGee ("On Foood and Cooking") confirms that lactose caramelization and Maillard reactions are involved in making milk caramels. In fact, milk caramels are cooked at far too low a temperature to induce caramelization. Perhaps the simplest way to adjust the article would be to remove "milk and" from the sentence "caramel made from milk and sugar, especially in candies". Brad Daniels 03:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- I was just going to add something about this, having noticed it first on the dulce de leche page. I'll add contradictary tags. 184.108.40.206 04:52, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- If that's the simplest solution, why not just remove those words? Removing contradictory tags. 220.127.116.11 06:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
What about having some example here; I mean, a fully explained version of the reaction. Like the one at the beginning of the article for the Amadori rearrangement. 18.104.22.168 04:05, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
The "Factors" section claims: "low moisture levels are mainly necessary because water boils into steam at 212 Fahrenheit, whereas the Maillard reaction happens noticeably around 310 Fahrenheit: by the time something is in fact browning, all the water is gone" - which seems fishy to me since I just made dulce di leche in boiling water at atmospheric pressure. The reference cited at the end of the sentence doesn't have this specific information, just a listing of the general factors furthering a reaction. Anyone care to comment? Themel (talk) 07:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
The article gives maple syrup as an example; however, maple syrup is drawn off at temps near to 220 Celsius and certainly well below 232 degrees Celsius (soft ball stage), which is inconsistent with saying the Maillard requires low moisture and temps near 300 Celsius. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 19:27, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
WRITE THE REACTION OUT or a partial one at the reaction sites
the reaction will summerize the explanation you gave of it to greater effect.
The Maillard reaction is not a single simple reaction, but a large schema of how large classes of products (thousands certainly) might react. For his reason it cannot be written out except diagrammatically126.96.36.199 (talk) 06:31, 28 January 2017 (UTC).
It's a really good idea to start articles on science with at least a couple of sentences that will make sense to a layperson, and give some idea why any of the rest might be worth persevering with. This reaction, for example, is of vital importance in cooking! Everyone's seen its results almost every day of their lives! Yet we don't get to that till after several sentences' worth of seriously dense chemistry. I'm not in the mood to fix this myself today, and anyway this might make a useful exercise for someone, if they fancy it. This is a fascinating subject! Hook your audience first, don't throw them in at the deep end in the second sentence! Cheers. --Oolong (talk) 21:32, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Is that really the best image to illustrate the browning Maillard causes? I mean, for one thing, it's... sausages. Not exactly the most attractive picture. For another thing, it's really not very clear what's being shown, and doesn't particularly illustrate Maillard browning. Oh sure, there's plenty of it there, but... I think we'd be better served by a nice, clear picture of that browning. Like, perhaps, the image from the bottom of the "toast" page? I'm going to go ahead and change it, but if there's some reason people wanted the sausage picture, feel free to let me know. AlexDitto 01:58, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I will revert to the previous picture, since the brown color of toasted bread is due mostly to dextrinisation of starch (and also to Maillard), while the brown color of sausages is mostly due to Maillard. AxelBoldt (talk) 03:25, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
- I'd like to second the motion for a tastier, more obvious picture. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 00:05, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- High temperature cooking of certain foods (particularly plants like potatoes) may produce small amounts of acrylamide (insignificant with respect to human health). You can read more about it at the FDA article on acrylamide. PDCook (talk) 02:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Dextrinisation is different
I removed the claim that dextrinisation is the same as the Maillard reaction. Dextrinisation is the breakdown of starch under dry heat and doesn't involve amino acids. It is partially responsible for the browning of toast, so the caption of the photo in the article should probably be modified. See here. AxelBoldt (talk) 02:01, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
There's nothing here about why it has that name, who "discovered" it, when, where, how, etc. If anyone has a line on that info, I'd be quite curious to see it. — JediRogue (talk) 07:41, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
inline citation strangeness
It is used to indicate page number within the reference used. I fixed a minor problem in it. Brambleclawx 22:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Type of Chemistry
I was looking through the article wondering, "What type of chemistry is this?" And I couldn't find anything about it. So can someone please tell me what classical type of chemistry this falls under? (Possibly Organic Chemistry?) This should be added to the article too. Thanks, Tall Guy Wonder (talk) 22:19, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Link to Flavoring is broken
This article contains a link to Flavoring, which has been deleted and redirected to Seasoning. The content of Seasoning pertains strictly to the use of herbs and spices to modify the flavor of food, and can therefore have little or nothing to do with any "flavoring industry".
However, there is content at Talk:Flavoring that suggests that there used to be a page called Flavoring that said something about artificial flavoring, which is certainly what the flavoring industry must do.
However, that page also contains talk of "merging" the article with Seasoning. In reality, the content was not merged, but deleted, and there is nothing on Wikipedia or anywhere else that says anything of substance about artificial flavors. The closest thing Wikipedia has yet to delete is an article on Flavorists, which only states what education is required to become one, and is itself vulnerable to deletion due to its lack of content.
Maillard Reaction in meat
It seems like a Maillard reaction occurring during the cooking of meat would be impossible without adding extra ingredients. The reaction is between proteins and reducing sugars - meat only contains the proteins. The reaction cannot be a Maillard reaction since no reducing sugars are present. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LanceRGoebel (talk • contribs) 20:01, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
There is a TINY amount of carbohydrate in meat/muscle tissue, which declines dramatically, though variably after slaughter, but it appears to be insufficient to create the 'fond' in meat. Food Chemistry, 4th edition, Belitz et all states ... (sect 12.3.10) "Sugars are only 0.1–0.15% of the weight of fresh muscle,of which 0.1% is shared by glucose-6-phosphate and other phosphorylated sugars. The free sugars present are glucose (0.009–0.09%), fructose and ribose". So a 5lb roast might have as much as 3.39gram (less than a teaspoon) of sugars at slaughter, but from the tables in Belitz et al, we might expect that to decrease by perhaps a factor of 5 during rigor mortis, and of course only a modest fraction of this ~0.7 gram of sugars is available at the surface of the roast for Maillard reactions. My conclusion is the claim that meat browning is due to Mailliard reactions rather than amino+fatty-acid carbonyl reactions lacks evidence.  184.108.40.206 (talk) 06:28, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Both the second and third reaction mechanism pictures are flawed. In the second one, the 3-deoxyhexulose is depicted with a hydroxy group that shouldn't be there. (on carbon atom 3) In the third mechanism, the schiff base is depicted with a pentavalent nitrogen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 21:02, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
But why is it delicious?
The article mentions that the Maillard reaction makes food delicious but does not explain further. For reference, I think McGee's "On Food and Cooking" may have had a chemical explanation (starch sweetness, I think), but I'd like to also see a biological explanation. Was there some evolutionary pressure? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 00:09, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Explanations of evolutionary pressure have a circular-logic fallacy aspect that I find problematic. Having warned you ...
Malliard reactions clearly decrease the nutritional value of foods, but might indicate increased digestibility of gelatinized starches or increased infection safety for meats & fish.22.214.171.124 (talk) 08:01, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
- Belitz, H.-D., Grosch, W., & Schieberle, P. (2009). Food chemistry. Berlin: Springer