8/18/2014 BMG - A Comparison of North American Two-Row and Six-Row Malting Barley

http://morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/bmg/schwarz.html 1/11

Table of Contents

Also in this article

Special Focus: MaltMalting BarleyProduction inNorth America

The Anatomy of aBarley Spike

Barley BreedingPrograms andTheir Innovations

FactorsInfluencing thePrice of Malt

A Comparison of North American Two-

Row and Six-Row Malting Barleyby Paul Schwarz and Richard Horsley

Ever since its introduction to North America in the 17thcentury, barley has taken on a life of its own. Both two-row and six-row North American malted barley are ratherdifferent from their European cousins and have developeddistinctive new characteristics. Genetics, climate, andbreeding practices have produced a rich variety of maltqualities from which to choose.

A brewer's preference for two- or six-row barley can be born of anumber of factors, including barley and malt purchase prices,quality specifications, and brewing traditions. Product quality isin turn affected by genetic makeup, environmental conditions,and the practices of the grower and the maltster.

It is widely believed that two-row barleys are the best barleys formalting and brewing (1). In fact, outside North America most ofthe world's brewing nations exclusively use two-row barley formalt. Six-row barleys, if produced overseas at all, are largelyused only for feed.

The situation in North America, however, is rather different andwarrants closer examination. Modern American brewingpractices have relied on six-row barleys, partly because theywere better adapted to many regions. In addition, barleybreeding efforts over the past 50 years have reduced, if notobscured, some of the differences between two- and six-rowbarleys and malts. Yet important distinctions remain in terms ofkernel size, extract, protein, and enzyme levels.

The historical preference for two-row barley is based on the factthat two-row barley yields malts with 1-2% greater theoreticalextract, meaning that brewers can brew more beer. Large-scalebrewers, however, must balance the higher extract yield againstthe higher cost and lower diastatic power of two-row malt.Small-scale brewers with less focus on extract yield may findthe differences between the two negligible.

This article delineates some of the principal differences betweenNorth American six- and two-row malts in the context ofhistorical developments and current production.

8/18/2014 BMG - A Comparison of North American Two-Row and Six-Row Malting Barley

http://morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/bmg/schwarz.html 2/11

The Historical Development of

Malting Barley ProductionOverview: Cultivated barley (Hordeum vulgare) is not native toNorth America. English, Dutch, and French traders introducedbarley to the eastern seaboard during the early years ofEuropean settlement (2,3). The Spanish introduced it to Mexicoand the American Southwest. The imported English two-rowbarley enjoyed adequate growing conditions on the coast, butas production spread into western New York, six-row barleyproduction dominated because of the climate. The increasingdemand for beer in new midwestern and western citiescontinued to draw barley producers further west, luring them toagricultural lands more favorable to cereal grain crops.Improvements in the transportation system also helped makethis westward shift possible.

North American production trends: United States. As of themid- to late 1800s, U.S. barley production centered in the areanow referred to as the Corn Belt (Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota,and southern Wisconsin). Disease and competition from cornand soybean crops, however, led to the eventual decline ofbarley in this region, and U.S. production shifted elsewhere.Today, North Dakota and Minnesota produce the majority of thesix-row malting barley in the United States, with lesser amountsproduced in South Dakota and Idaho. Two-row barley productionpredominates in Montana, Idaho, Washington, Colorado, andWyoming. Both climatic and qualitative differences contribute tothe split.

Canada. Canada is now a world leader in malting barleycultivation. Production has gradually shifted from the East to theprairie provinces of Saskatchewan, Alberta, and, to a lesserextent, Manitoba. All three provinces grow both two-row and six-row malting barley cultivars, but two-row production dominatesCanadian crops.

Mexico. Malting barley production in Mexico is almostexclusively six-row. Most production occurs in the centralstates, which are generally in close proximity to malt houses.

The box "Malting Barley Production in North America" presentsmore detailed information on barley production in each country.

Irrigated vs. Dryland Production and Grain YieldsAll two- and six-row malting barley varieties produced in Canadaand the United States are spring types (Europe grows bothspring and winter malting barleys). Seeding takes place in thespring, and harvest occurs from late summer to early fall. Grainyield and hence malt quality are influenced by many factorsfrom seeding through harvest, including variety seeded,environment, diseases and pests, soil fertility, and theagronomic practices of the grower (see Table I).

Table I: Relative Production Two-Row vs. Six Row*

Grain Yield(bushels/acre)

Test Wt.(lb/bushel)

KernelPlumpness (%)**

8/18/2014 BMG - A Comparison of North American Two-Row and Six-Row Malting Barley

http://morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/bmg/schwarz.html 3/11

Western-grown two-row, irrigated

145 54 89

Western-grown two-row, dryland

90 52 78

Midwestern-grown six-row, dryland

88 47 78

* Typical grain quality parameters for barley produced in the U.S. (Optimal values) ** Percent retained on a 2.4 X 19.0 mm slotted sieve.

Irrigation boosts yields in the western United States: Thetwo-row varieties grown in the western United States realize thegreatest yield potential, test weight, and kernel plumpnessrelative to all other barley produced in North America. Thisadvantage comes largely because western barley is more likelyto be irrigated by farmers growing under a contract with amaltster. Maltsters pay a premium as an incentive for farmers togrow high-quality malting barley cultivars rather than the better-yielding feed barley. The farmers can thus afford the costlyirrigation. Barley not grown under contract is often grown underdryland conditions that limit the plant's growth potential. Highdaytime temperatures and/or lack of timely rains during criticalperiods of crop growth limit the grain yield and kernelplumpness. Irrigation helps mitigate the effects of adverseenvironmental conditions that can reduce the quality of thegrain, thus ensuring a consistent supply of quality two-rowmalting barley.

Barley in dryland conditions: Six-row barley yields in theAmerican Midwest are comparable to dryland yields of two-rowbarley in the West for many of the same reasons stated above(climate, irrigation). When western or European two-rowcultivars are grown in the Midwest, they generally yield less andhave fewer plump kernels than adapted six-row varieties. This isbecause the western two-row varieties were developed for areasthat may get hot during the day, but that have cool nighttimetemperatures that allow the plants to "recover"; the differencebetween daytime and nighttime temperatures is not as great inthe Midwest as it is in the West. The cultivar Triumph developedin Germany, for example, has been successfully produced inthe American West.

Disease pressure in the Midwest also limits the yield of manytwo-row cultivars. On the other hand, midwestern six-rowcultivars (with a wider range of adaptation) transplanted to theWest have yields comparable to two-row varieties.Consequently, some midwestern varieties are grown undercontract in the western United States; the contracting of barleyin the Midwest, however, is limited.

Canadian barley is grown almost exclusively under dryland

8/18/2014 BMG - A Comparison of North American Two-Row and Six-Row Malting Barley

http://morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/bmg/schwarz.html 4/11

conditions, but these conditions are not necessarily equivalentto those of the American Midwest; growing conditions (rainfall,length of season, temperature, and so forth) vary between, andeven within, provinces, allowing the growth of both two- and six-row barley. Western Canadian yields are, on average, lowerthan those for irrigated western U.S. barley.Only a small amount of Mexican barley is irrigated.

Factors Affecting Barley QualityAlthough breeding programs have minimized the differencesbetween two- and six-row barley, differences remain in terms ofkernel size/uniformity, grain protein content, and malt enzymelevels (3). Kernel size and protein directly influence the mannerin which six- and two-row barleys are malted by affecting therate of water uptake, germination, and modification (see Tables Iand II).

Table II: Comparitive Analytical Data*

Two-Row

Six-Row

Extract (% dry basis) 81.0 79.0

Total protein (% dry basis) 11.5 12.5

Soluble protein (% of the malt, drybasis)

5.0 5.5

Soluble total protein (%) 43.5 44.0

Diastatic power (�Lintner) 120 160

a-amylase (dextrinizing units) 50 45

Wort viscosity (cP) 1.5 1.5

Wort ß-glucan (ppm) 110 140

Wort color (�SRM) 1.5 1.5

*Typical two- and six-row malt quality parameters for barleyproduced in the United States. Malt quality data representapproximate averages. It must be remembered thatconsiderable variation due to changes in growing conditions,barley quality, or malt processing can occur, even within thesame cultivar. Malt quality data are based on themethodology of the American Society of Brewing Chemists.

Kernel size and uniformity: The central kernel of six-rowbarleys is symmetrical, but the two lateral kernels are slightlytwisted and also tend to be slightly shorter and thinner (4). Two-row barley kernels, by contrast, tend to be symmetrical inshape, more uniform in size, and plumper because only onekernel/rachis node develops (see box, "The Anatomy of a BarleySpike"). Because of the irregularities in kernel size, maltstersoften separate each lot of six-row barley into several kernel sizefractions for more uniform germination and modification.Plumper fractions are reblended upon completion of malting andused as brewer's malt. The thinner malt kernels may be sold asdistiller's malt, where it is preferred for its high enzymaticactivity. The thinnest barley kernels are removed and sold asfeed. Two-row barleys often don't require such extra handling

8/18/2014 BMG - A Comparison of North American Two-Row and Six-Row Malting Barley

http://morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/bmg/schwarz.html 5/11

because their kernel size is more uniform.

A major advance came in 1961 with the release of the six-rowcultivar Larker (5). Larker significantly reduced the sizedifferential between large kernels in six- and two-row cultivars.The name Larker, in fact, was coined from the words "largekernels." Although this variety is no longer used for malting(having been replaced by newer, improved cultivars), kernelplumpness in six-row cultivars released since that time hasgenerally continued to increase. Nevertheless, the plumpness oftwo-row cultivars still tends to be greater, particularly whengrown under irrigation in adapted environments.

Kernel plumpness serves as a moderate indicator of maltextract yield (3). Plumper kernels are thought to have a higherstarch content, which is the principal contributor to extract.Before the breeding breakthroughs of the 1970s, the extractfrom six-row malts was as much as 4% below those of two-rowmalts. The release of the cultivar Morex (so-named because ithas "more extract") in 1978 marked a trend toward higherextract levels for six-row barley (5). Currently, six-row malts areonly 1-2% lower.

Protein levels: Another important distinction between six- andtwo-row barley cultivars is in the average level of grain protein(3). A high protein level often indicates a thinner kernel with lessstarch available for conversion to malt extract. Acceptable six-row malting barleys may range from 12 to 13.5% protein,whereas two-row cultivars range from 11 to 13%; barleys withgreater than 13.5% protein are rarely used for malt. The hightemperatures and moisture stress frequently encountered indryland conditions (under which most six-row barley is grown)can limit the amount of grain fill (starch synthesis) and thusresult in higher protein contents.

The protein content differential is also related to geneticdifferences in how each cultivar accumulates protein duringgrain development. Total protein content is defined as nitrogencontent x 6.25. Because the net loss of nitrogen during maltingis minimal, the total protein content does not change greatly inthe process. Much of the barley protein, however, is convertedinto a soluble form by proteolytic enzymes; a portion of this isfurther broken down into amino acids and peptides in the wort.

Six-row malts tend to yield higher levels of wort-soluble protein.The ratio of soluble protein to total protein is an indication of theextent of protein breakdown (modification) during malting: 40-45% is considered acceptable.

Higher protein malting barleys are generally believed to inverselyreduce the level of malt extract in the kernel. In addition, highprotein content can lengthen steeping time, cause erraticgermination (especially if grain traders blend low- and high-protein barleys to meet protein limits), increase malting losses,and increase enzymatic activity and, ultimately, the level ofdimethyl sulfide. High soluble protein levels can sometimesresult in brewing or beer-quality problems.

8/18/2014 BMG - A Comparison of North American Two-Row and Six-Row Malting Barley

http://morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/bmg/schwarz.html 6/11

Malt modification time: While most six-row barley cultivarsrequire four-and-a-half to five days of germination to achieveproper malt modification, traditional North American two-rowcultivars generally require an additional one to two days ofgermination time (3). Harrington, however, a two-row cultivarreleased in 1981, modifies in only four days. BecauseHarrington is currently the predominant two-row cultivar in NorthAmerica, particularly in Canada, it can safely be stated thatmodern two-row barleys generally require less malting time thansix-row barleys -- a testimony to the success of modernbreeding programs. This advantage represents a majoreconomic consideration for maltsters. This change of tendencyfor two-row cultivars has represented a major advancementachieved through barley breeding.

Malt enzymes: Six-row malts traditionally (that is, beforerecent breeding advances) yielded higher levels of the desirablestarch-degrading enzymes a-amylases and greater diastaticpower (DP). a-amylases are the enzymes that convert starch todextrins, reduce mash or cooker viscosity, and increase thesusceptibility of starch to ß-amylase attack (7,8). DP is ameasure of the activity of the malt enzymes that break downcomplex carbohydrates into reducing sugars (principally ß-amylase, the key saccharifying enzyme responsible forconverting starch to fermentable maltose and for further breakingdown large dextrins). The modern two-row cultivar Harrington,however, has levels of a-amylases equal to or slightly greaterthan those of current six-row malting cultivars. Despite therecent advances in favor of more a-amylases, two-row maltscontinue to have considerably lower levels of DP -- a potentiallylimiting factor in some applications, such as when high levels ofunmalted grains are used as adjuncts.

ß-glucans. The ß-glucan content of most barley cultivars fallsbetween 4 and 7% of the total grain weight (9). In general, theß-glucan content of six-row barleys is slightly lower than that oftwo-row barleys. ß-glucans are usually extensively degraded bymalt ß-glucanase enzymes during germination, meaning thatlittle will be extracted into wort. Undegraded ß-glucanscontribute to viscosity and can cause wort separation and beerfiltration problems (10). Both two- and six-row North Americanmalts tend to be well modified; ß-glucan-related problems arenot often encountered but are more likely when undermodifiedmalt or high levels of umalted barley are used.

Husk content: Husk content provides one other differencebetween two- and six-row barley. A thin, tightly adhering husk isdesirable in all malting cultivars because the husk protects thegerminating grain during malting and plays an important role inlautering. Six-row barleys are generally believed to have a higherhusk content because they tend toward thinner kernels, buthusk content varies with growth environment (11). High huskcontent barley can mean more phenolics end up in the wort,thereby contributing an astringent flavor to beer. Oxidizablepolyphenolic substances react with proteins and may contributeto haze formation (8). Care must be taken in the brewingprocess to avoid extraction of these compounds from the husk

8/18/2014 BMG - A Comparison of North American Two-Row and Six-Row Malting Barley

http://morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/bmg/schwarz.html 7/11

and to promote their precipitation in the wort (the hot break).

Implications for Brewing Practice

Protein and DP: In terms of brewing performance, the mostapparent differences between two-and six-row malts relate totheir levels of grain protein and diastatic power. The higherprotein and enzyme levels of adapted six-row cultivars allow forthe widespread use of cereal adjuncts in major North Americanbreweries and the double-mash* system for precooking them(4).

*The double mash system is used with rice or corn grits. A portion of the

malt bil l can be replaced (usually no more than 40%) with rice or corn.

The rice or corn grits are first "cooked" with a small portion of the malt in a

separate vessel known as a cereal cooker. Most of the malt wil l be mashed

in the main mash vessel. As the temperature rises in the cereal cooker, the

adjunct starch is gelatinized, which makes it susceptible to enzymatic

hydrolysis by the amylases contained in the malt. Eventually, the cooker

temperature will reach boil ing, after which the cereal mash is transferred to

the main mash tun. This transfer usually occurs at the end of the main

mash protein rest and raises the main mash temperature to

saccharification temperature.

Uniformity and size: The more uniform kernel size distributionof two-row malt helps brewers, at least those using two-rollermills, obtain a proper grind at the beginning of the brewingprocess (12). Kernel size differences, however, are likely to beless significant when using more sophisticated six-roller millswith screening systems, such as those used by the majorbreweries. In terms of the type of wort separation method used,a larger grist particle size distribution is extremely important inlautering, and virtually unimportant with the modern mash filtersused by some large-scale brewers. Mash filters are able tohandle smaller particles because they use filter cloth, a lowerbed depth, and higher pressures.

Extract yield: Two-row barley yields malts with 1-2% greatertheoretical extract (13). Extract is a major economic concern formany large-scale brewers because the amount of brewhouseextract obtained determines the amount of beer that can beproduced from a given amount of malt. Small-scale brewers,however, are generally less concerned about extract yield andmay not consider this as important a criterion in their maltchoice. Large-scale brewers must weigh the higher extractlevels of two-row malts against higher cost and often lowerdiastatic power.

Soluble protein: During the malting and brewing processes,approximately 38-45% of the malt protein is converted to wort-soluble protein in the form of various nitrogenous substances,including peptides and amino acids (3,7,8,13). The balance ofthese components in the wort is important because theycontribute to beer foam and mouthfeel, beer color and flavor, andyeast metabolism.

Some soluble protein is essential. Problems can arise, however,

8/18/2014 BMG - A Comparison of North American Two-Row and Six-Row Malting Barley

http://morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/bmg/schwarz.html 8/11

when levels become excessive in wort or beer. This leveldepends on the process and product, but problems might beexpected when wort-soluble protein exceeds 5.5%. High levelsof protein, like those found in six-row malts, can lead to toomuch color development during wort boiling, filtration problems,and the risk of haze formation.

Proteins and adjuncts. The widespread use of unmalted cerealadjuncts (corn, rice, etc.) by North American brewersdeveloped, in part, to compensate for the higher soluble proteinlevels of six-row malts and, later, because adjuncts arecheaper. It is generally accepted that 150-170 ppm aminonitrogen (component of soluble protein) is required in the wort tosupport adequate yeast metabolism and fermentation (12). Ahigh-protein six-row malt will provide levels far in excess ofthese values. Because the protein in corn or rice adjuncts islargely insoluble, it is possible to replace a portion of the maltwith adjunct and thus dilute the overall level of wort-solublenitrogen. Cereal adjuncts can be used to replace up to 40% ofsix-row malt grist without adversely affecting fermentationperformance. Two-row malt typically allows for less adjunct usebecause of its lower soluble nitrogen levels and lower diastaticpower.

The use of cereal adjuncts began as an innovative response toavailable malt quality and was born of concern for quality. Now,with improved North American malt strains available, it is nolonger necessary but is now both economically advantageousand traditional for those breweries' beers.

Proteins and DMS. Protein levels also increase the potential fordimethyl sulphide (DMS) formation in beer. The precursor ofDMS, S-methyl methionine (SMM), is formed through proteinbreakdown during malting (14,15). Much of the SMM isconverted to DMS through thermal decomposition during kilningand wort boiling. DMS formed during kilning and wort boiling islost to the atmosphere. Pale malts generally have higher levelsof SMM than do darker, highly kilned malts. When the length orvigor of boiling is inadequate to convert all residual SMM, DMSmay continue to form as the wort cools. This DMS may persistinto the beer. Although some DMS is desirable in lager beers,levels in excess of 50 ppb are thought to contribute a cooked orsweet corn flavor. Six-row malts contain higher levels of theDMS precursor SMM, presumably because of their higherprotein content.

Malt enzymes: Higher protein levels are somewhat positivelycorrelated with malt enzyme levels and six-row cultivars tend tohave higher levels of DP than do two-row cultivars (3,14). Levelsof a-amylase are roughly equal.

Because the ratio of DP to a-amylase is greater in six-rowmalts, one might expect conversion to fermentable sugars toproceed more rapidly. This may be of importance whenthroughput (brews/day) is a concern. For the home brewer, itmay provide some leeway when high mash-in temperatures areused because more conversion would take place. ß-amylase,

8/18/2014 BMG - A Comparison of North American Two-Row and Six-Row Malting Barley

http://morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/bmg/schwarz.html 9/11

the major component of DP, is much more temperature-sensitive than a-amylase and is inactivated earlier in the mash.

Syrup adjuncts. Although the higher level of DP in six-row maltsalso allows brewers to use more cereal adjuncts (see "Proteinsand adjuncts," above), the situation with syrup adjuncts issomewhat different. Syrups are prepared through the enzymatichydrolysis of corn starch to fermentable sugars. Because thisadjunct is added in a fermentable form, excess malt enzyme isnot needed for fermentation. In fact, some brewers have reportedproblems with the high enzyme and soluble protein levels ofcertain modern six-row cultivars.

A World of ChoicesMany differences distinguish two- and six-row malt, but thesedifferences have become less pronounced over the past 20years as new varieties have been bred. The high protein andenzyme content of six-row barley makes it unlikely that abrewer producing an all-malt beer would wish to use exclusivelysix-row malt. Supplementing two-row malt with some six-rowmalt, however, might serve to increase extraction, conversiontime, and fermentability, especially with high proportions ofadjunct. Although most craft brewers don't normally use cornand rice, other unmalted grains such as wheat, barley, and oatsare becoming increasingly common.

On a final note, it should be mentioned that every barley cultivar,whether six-row or two-row, can have distinct effects on theorganoleptic (flavor, aroma, color) characteristics of beer (3).Two-row malts are generally believed to yield a mellower flavor,but these differences are very difficult to quantify. Malting barleyand malt are marketed on the basis of cultivar, and, thanks tomodern breeding practices, brewers have a world of optionswhen choosing which cultivar best meets their processing andbeer quality requirements.

AcknowledgementsThe authors thank Sherman Chan, Scott Heisel, John Holt,Norman Kendall, Mauro Zamora Diaz, John Mittleider, andWilliam Wilson for their valuable input. Statistics on barleyproduction in Canada and the United States were from reportsprovided by the American Malting Barley Association(Milwaukee, Wisconsin) and the Brewing and Malting BarleyResearch Institute (Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada).

References

1. J. DeClerck, "Barley," in A Textbook of Brewing, Vol. 1

(Chapman and Hall, London, 1957), pp. 7-49.

2. G.A. Wiebe, "Introduction of Barley into the New World,"

in Barley: Origin, Botany, Culture, Winterhardiness,Genetics, Utilization, Pests, Agricultural Handbook No.38 (U.S. Department of Agriculture, AgriculturalResearch Service, Washington, D.C., 1968), pp. 2-8.

8/18/2014 BMG - A Comparison of North American Two-Row and Six-Row Malting Barley

http://morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/bmg/schwarz.html 10/11

3. W.C. Burger and D.E. Laberge, "Malting and Brewing

Quality," in Barley, D.C. Rasmusson, Ed. (AmericanSociety of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin, 1985), pp.367-401.

4. D.J. Gebhardt, D.C. Rasmusson, and R.G. Fulcher,

"Kernel Morphology and Malting Quality Variation inLateral and Central Kernels of Six-Row Barley," Journalof the American Society of Brewing Chemists 51 (4), pp.145-148 (1993).

5. P.B. Schwarz and R.D. Horsley, "Malt Quality

Improvement in North American Six-Rowed BarleyCultivars Since 1910," Journal of the American Societyof Brewing Chemists 53 (1), pp. 14-18 (1995).

6. P. Bergal and M. Clemencet, "The Botany of the Barley

Plant," in Barley and Malt: Biology, Biochemistry andTechnology, A.H. Cook, Ed. (Academic Press, NewYork, 1962), pp. 1-23.

7. D.E. Briggs, "Barley Germination: Biochemical Changes

and Hormonal Control," in Barley: Genetics,Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, and Biotechnology,P.R. Shewry, Ed. (C.A.B. International, Wallingford,United Kingdom, 1992), pp. 369-412.

8. D.E. Briggs, J.S. Hough, R. Stevens, and T.W. Young,

"The Chemistry and Biochemistry of Mashing," in Maltingand Brewing Science, Vol. 1, 2nd ed. (Chapman andHall, London, 1981), pp. 254-303.

9. A.W. MacGregor and G.B. Fincher, "Carbohydrates," in

Barley: Chemistry and Technology, A.W. MacGregor andR.S. Bhatty, Eds. (American Association of CerealChemists, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1947), pp. 73-130.

10. C.W. Bamforth, "ß-Glucan and ß-Glucanases in Malting

and Brewing: Practical Aspects," Brewers Digest, May1994, pp. 12-16.

11. R.H. Harris and G. Scott, "Proportion of Hull in Some

North Dakota Barley Varieties," Cereal Chemistry 24, pp.477-485 (1993).

12. D. Thomas and G. Palmer, "Malt," The New Brewer 11

(2), pp. 10-15 (1994).

13. W.W. Wilson, "Production and Marketing in the United

States and Canada," in Barley, D.C. Rasmusson, Ed.(American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin,1985), pp. 483-510.

14. C.W. Bamforth and A.H.P. Barclay, "Malting Technology

8/18/2014 BMG - A Comparison of North American Two-Row and Six-Row Malting Barley

http://morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/bmg/schwarz.html 11/11

and the Uses of Malt," in Barley: Chemistry andTechnology, A.W. MacGregor and R.S. Bhatty, Eds.(American Association of Cereal Chemists, St. Paul,Minnesota, 1993), pp. 297-354.

15. T. O'Rourke, "Making the Most of Your Malt," The New

Brewer 11 (2), pp. 16-22 (1994).

Paul Schwarz is an associate professor of Cereal Science atNorth Dakota State University, where he specializes in researchon the biochemistry of barley and malt quality. He is a memberof the American Society of Brewing Chemists, the MasterBrewers Association of the Americas, the American ChemicalSociety, and the American Association of Cereal Chemists.

Richard Horsley is an associate professor of Plant Science atNorth Dakota State University. He is a barley breeder andspecializes in research on the genetics of malt quality anddisease resistance. He is a member of the American Society ofAgronomy and the Crop Science Society of the Americas.