Where Does the Brown in Brown Sugar Come From? — Ingredient Intelligence | The Kitchn (Image credit: Christine Gallary ) I love baking and cooking with a freshly opened package of brown sugar. I love packing it tightly into a measuring up and that oh-so-satisfying feeling I get when it flips out, perfectly molded, like sand for a sand castle. So how is brown sugar made, and what's the difference between light brown and dark brown sugar? How Brown Sugar Is Made Brown sugar is a bit of a generic term — it's simply sugar that contains molasses, with the molasses giving it that distinctive brown color and flavor. There are two ways that brown sugar can be made: Unrefined or partially refined brown sugar is sugar that still contains some molasses from the original sugar refining process. It can be labeled factory, raw, natural, turbinado, demerara, and muscavado, among other names, depending on origin and the refining process. These sugars may not be as soft and moist as more refined brown sugars. Refined brown sugar is made by adding molasses back to refined white sugar.

This is the commercial brown sugar that is soft and moist and what is commonly thought of as brown sugar, so we'll focus in on this type and how it's used. (Image credit: Christine Gallary ) Light vs. Dark Brown Sugar Recipes will sometimes specify dark brown or light brown sugar, so what's the difference? It's simply the amount of molasses in it: Dark brown sugar contains about 6.5% molasses. Light brown (or sometimes labeled golden brown) sugar contains about 3.5% molasses. How Moisture Affects the Texture of Refined Brown Sugar Brown sugar is naturally moist and soft because of the thin film of molasses that covers each sugar crystal. If the moisture in the molasses evaporates, however, the sugar hardens into one mass, so it should always be sealed in an airtight container to prevent moisture loss. But the nice thing is that molasses is also hygroscopic, which means that it readily absorbs moisture. This means that if your brown sugar has hardened, you can seal it with bread or an apple so the molasses can steal and suck up its moisture to soften the brown sugar again!

Brown Sugar Softening Tips A Simple Way to Soften Hard Brown Sugar in a Hurry Cooking and Baking with Brown Sugar Molasses is the key flavor in brown sugar, so dark brown sugar has a richer, more caramel-y flavor than light brown. If your recipe does not specify which kind of brown sugar to use, you can probably use whatever you have on hand, but pick the one you think is better suited to the recipe. If you want deeper flavors, go with dark brown, but if you don't want the molasses to overpower the other flavors in the recipe, go with light. More on Brown Sugar Hygroscopy of Brown vs. White Sugar, the Banana Bread Test | COMSOL Blog Hygroscopy of Brown vs. White Sugar, the Banana Bread Test Fanny Littmarck | September 11, 2014 Baking is just like chemistry class, except you get to eat the results. Today, we narrow in on one ingredient in particular: sugar. More than just a sweetener, sugar serves several other purposes in baking. For one, it keeps our baked goods moist thanks to its hygroscopic properties.

Dry Ingredient with Wet Properties: Sugar Is Hygroscopic Last month, I discussed hygroscopy and what happens when a hygroscopic material absorbs and retains moisture . I mentioned that when certain materials get wet, they absorb the moisture and swell up. Sugar is one such material, but as you’ll see, not all sugars are the same. Left: Granulated sugar, sucrose. Right: Clementines, which contain fructose. Different Types of Sugars Chefs have plenty of options to choose from when it comes to sweeteners. In The Pastry Chef’s Apprentice, author Mitch Stamm provides a good overview of the various types of sugars in the “Sweeteners” chapter . He lists them in order of sweetness level, with sucrose (table sugar) as the control. Below is an excerpt of Stamm’s table: Sweetener Some of the sweeteners listed in The Pastry Chef’s Apprentice. Is Brown Sugar More Hygroscopic Than White Sugar? Brown sugar is just granulated white sugar with the molasses added to it. You will typically find two varieties of brown sugar: dark and light. The dark variety contains about 6.5% molasses by weight, while the light contains roughly 3.5%.

As we can see in the table above, the molasses reduces the sweetness of brown sugar ever so slightly as compared to white sugar (listed as sucrose above). A quick online search unveils a lot of debate around whether or not you can substitute brown and white sugar interchangeably when baking. Some say they are completely interchangeable, others say you need to alter the amounts when substituting one for the other. Many state personal preferences on when to use which type of sugar (e.g., “Use white for cake!”, “Use brown for breads!”, etc.) I’ll take that as my cue to head to the kitchen. Let’s bake and investigate. Testing the Theory with Banana Bread One resource suggests that brown sugar would make breads, such as banana or zucchini bread, more moist than if you made them with white sugar. I found a recipe for vegan banana bread a while back, which I thought was very good. The original recipe calls for white sugar and I do not remember thinking it felt dry the last time I made it. After reading up on the hygroscopy of sugar and the brown vs. white sugar discussions, this recipe seemed like a good place to start testing out the theory.

Since the original recipe was not dry, I figured that by substituting the white sugar for the same amount of brown sugar, which is more hygroscopic, the banana bread would be excessively moist. The Recipe The original vegan banana bread recipe is from . As usual, I substituted the all-purpose flour with whole wheat flour, so here are the ingredients for my slightly modified version: 1 1/4 Cups whole wheat flour 1 Teaspoon baking soda 1/2 Teaspoon kosher salt 3 Very ripe medium bananas, mashed 3/4 Cup sugar (Note: I used light brown sugar for Version 1 and granulated sugar for Version 2) 1/2 Cup plain soy milk yogurt 1/2 Cup canola oil 1 Teaspoon pure vanilla extract Bananas “in the mashing”. Some Steps in the Baking Process I made the two versions back-to-back, starting with the brown sugar banana bread. I took photos throughout the process to share with you. Version 1 is shown on the left and Version 2 on the right.

Again, the only difference between the two is the type of sugar, all else is held equal (as best I could; not all parts of the process were constant, as I’m a home chef working in my kitchen as opposed to a food scientist following a standardized factory process). Version 1: Mixing brown sugar into the other ingredients. Version 2: Adding white sugar instead. Naturally, the batter containing brown sugar was darker than the one containing white sugar. That’s because of the molasses. Here they are in the greased and floured pan before going into the oven: Banana bread batter: Version 1, brown sugar. Banana bread batter: Version 2, white sugar. Once out of the 350°F oven, the difference in color was harder to distinguish, but still visible. Finished product: Version 1, brown sugar. Finished product: Version 2, white sugar. Next up: Taste tests. Inconclusive Results? During several rounds of taste tests, it was very hard to tell the difference between the two breads in terms of moisture. After each bite, the conclusion was always the same “Ah, now, this is the more moist bread.” In other words, there was no distinguishable difference.

What I did find, though, was a slight difference in both color and flavor between the two versions of the banana bread. The brown sugar version was slightly darker and the flavor had more depth and “roundness” to it. But, we can’t just base the results on one person’s experience, so I brought in the two contenders to work and shared them with some fellow COMSOL employees. The results surprised me. A Banana Bread Focus Group When feeding the bread to a small group of coworkers (ten, to be exact), we received mixed responses. Moistness Among the group (not including me), three detected no difference in moisture, six claimed the brown sugar version was more moist, and one said the bread made with white sugar was more moist. Two out of the ten coworkers tried the breads in a blind taste test. Interestingly enough, they disagreed over which one was more moist. Flavor While the main focus was on the moisture level, it seems impossible to discuss baked goods without also comparing the flavor. As we learned earlier, brown sugar is ever so slightly less sweet than white sugar. I personally noticed a slight difference in flavor, but not everyone in the focus group agreed.

The majority either could not tell a difference in sweetness or simply said “They were equally delicious,” which I take to mean the two were indistinguishable. Of those who noticed a difference, two people suggested the white sugar was sweeter. Two people said the banana bread made with brown sugar simply tasted better and one person preferred white sugar. Taste Test Comments Here are the comments from our two blind testers: Matt Milhomme: “My vegetarian super senses determined that the brown sugar bread was more moist. There was no noticeable difference in flavor.” Jessica Roy Mitchell: “[...] I was actually surprised by the results. I thought the white sugar one was sweeter and more moist. I also thought it might have been more banana flavored. That said, I preferred the sweetness level of the brown sugar flavored bread. It was less sweet overall and I think had less of the ‘back of the tongue’ kinda [sic] sweetness.” Next up, I’ll try something more dramatic to see if the results are more clear-cut, like cupcakes or muffins. Nothing says “Happy birthday!” quite like 12 soggy miniature cakes. Or would they turn out alright anyway?

Brown Sugar | Light Brown, Dark Brown, Natural Brown About Brown Sugar: The Basics Brown sugar gets its brown color and aroma from the presence of molasses. The distinctive moistness of brown sugar can also be attributed to the molasses, which is hygroscopic (can absorb water from the environment) in nature. Brown Sugar Production Brown sugar can be produced in two ways: Cane molasses can be added to refined white sugar crystals, so the sugar is actually coated with molasses, imparting the brown color and soft texture. The product that results is Refined Brown Sugar Molasses is present during sugar crystals formation (which happens in late stage sugar refinement), causing inclusion of the molasses within the sugar crystal itself. The product that results is Unrefined Brown Sugar. Note: Unrefined brown sugar can be coated with more molasses as desired. The majority of brown sugar produced is Refined Brown Sugar from beet sugar. The ability to manage the ratio of molasses to sugar makes this method convenient for manufacturers. In addition, this method facilitates color uniformity within and between batches of Brown Sugar. Furthermore, beet sugar crops require less water than sugarcane, so less water expense is incurred.

Colors of Brown Sugar It may be obvious that the darker the brown sugar, the more molasses is present, but what you may not know is how little difference in molasses it takes to make a huge difference in color. Light brown sugar contains about 3.5% molasses. Darker brown sugars can contain upwards of 6.5% molasses. Recipes that call for brown sugar are usually referring to light brown sugar. This is especially important for recipes that are affected by water, like cakes and cookies. Also, because of the presence of water (from the molasses), brown sugar is actually packs more densely than granulated sugar, and as a result, will have more calories by volume. Choosing Brown Sugar Since we've been sweet on brown sugar for decades, we know all about it. No matter which variety of brown sugar your company needs, we can help you make sure you get the best sugar at the best price. What kind of sugar should I eat?

- Eating Rules Wikipedia Page on Table Sugar Brown Sugar Regular “Brown Sugar” (the kind you get in the box at the grocery store) is usually just refined table sugar with a small amount (3.5% to 6.5%) of added molasses (which is a byproduct of the sugar-making process in the first place). The molasses imparts a unique flavor and texture, but it doesn’t make it more healthful. The Bottom Line: Brown sugar is sucrose. Wikipedia Page on Brown Sugar “Natural” Brown Sugars (Turbinado, Demerara, Muscovado) I’ve seen many articles refer to these sugars as “unrefined” or “raw,” and that’s a bit misleading. They may be raw if they haven’t been heated, but they’re certainly not “unrefined” — they are simply less refined than other crystalline sugars. They start with sugar cane, extract the juice, then heat it to evaporate the water. Once the sugar crystallizes, it is spun in a centrifuge (hence the name turbinado) to further dry the sugar and remove some impurities.

(Demerara sugar is similar, but is originally named for the Demerara colony in Guyana. It’s now produced in Mauritius.) Muscovado sugar (also known as “Barbados Sugar”) is similar, but is dried without using a centrifuge. The health claims of these products can be quite infuriating (for skeptics like us.) The brand Sugar In The Raw uses misleading (and completely meaningless) language, such as: “Nature’s own sweetener is gently converted into the natural crystals…” The Wholesome Sweeteners brand (the name alone is misleading) says “Organic Turbinado Sugar is made by crushing the freshly-cut sugar cane to squeeze out the juice, rich in, vitamins and minerals.”[sic] Of course, the next sentence tells us it’s evaporated and spun in a centrifuge — which means that they’ve just gone ahead and removed any of those “rich” vitamins and minerals. (I also didn’t realize that sugar cane was so amazingly high in vitamins and minerals. Oh,wait — it’s not.) If I had to choose between regular table sugar, brown sugar, or one of these, I’d probably go with the Muscovado.

Not because it’s any more nutritious (the sugar is the same, and there’s no significant vitamins, minerals, or other beneficial nutrients), but because it’s less processed — which means it hasn’t been bleached or boiled — which is probably better for the planet. I hesitated even writing that last part, since it’s still not an endorsement — but there are degrees to all things, and I think Muscovado is probably an improvement, no matter how slight, over the above options. The Bottom Line: These sugars may have more flavor and have other desirable properties for cooking but don’t be fooled by nutritional claims. They’re still all sucrose that’s been isolated from its natural source. Wikipedia Page on Natural Brown Sugar Agave Syrup Often called “Agave Nectar” (thus giving it a more healthful tone), this sweetener comes from several species of agave plant. I’ve heard people sing agave’s praises, specifically thinking it’s significantly less-processed than other sweeteners. That may or may not be true, as the sugar is extracted and processed through a few different methods , depending on the type of plant. It always requires more processing than honey, too. The pros? You may not use as much.

Agave tends to be sweeter than honey or regular sugar, so there’s a chance you’ll use less of it. I also love Marion Nestle’s pragmatic perspective : “Agave is more expensive so you probably won’t use as much of it.” The Bottom Line: Depending on the type of agave syrup, the composition can vary. Some may contain 56% fructose and 20% glucose (and the rest is other sugars). Others may have as much as 92% fructose. Great LA Times Agave Overview (2009), Wikipedia Page on Agave Barley Malt This (usually liquid) sweetener comes from sprouted barley (through the process of, you guessed it, malting ), and looks similar to molasses. Its primary sugar is maltose, and I’ve seen the maltose content reported as anywhere from 42% to 65%. Maltose is a pair of bonded glucose molecules (which are then broken apart into individual glucose molecules by your digestive system). It is about half as sweet as regular sugar, so you might be inclined to use more of it (which may also mean more calories).

However, it also has a rich, “malty” flavor, so you might find you need less “generic” sweetness because of the increased flavor. I have tasted barley malt when helping my homebrewing buddies, but until now I hadn’t considered using it as a sweetener in my foods. Next time I’m at a specialty market, I’ll see about picking up a jar of Eden Organic’s Barley Malt Syrup . The Bottom Line: Containing no fructose at all, and up to 65% maltose, Barley Malt Syrup is a promising alternative… if you like the taste. Wikipedia Pages on Barley Malt Syrup and Maltose Brown Rice Syrup Brown Rice Syrup is created by soaking/cooking brown rice with enzymes (usually from dried barley sprouts — meaning: barley malt) to break down the starches into accessible sugars. The liquid is then strained off and reduced to a syrup. It may also be produced by cooking brown rice flour (or brown rice starch) with enzymes — so your mental picture of simply boiling a pot of brown rice isn’t necessarily accurate. Nevertheless, the end result is a sweet syrup that is about 45% maltose.

It is similar to honey, but much less sweet, and has a nutty flavor with an aftertaste that’s similar to that of soy milk. Just like Barley Malt, you may be inclined to use more of it because it’s not as sweet. The Bottom Line: Containing no fructose at all, and about 45% maltose, Brown Rice Syrup is a promising alternative. Just remember that it’s still a highly-refined and concentrated source of calories. Wikipedia Page on Brown Rice Syrup Date Sugar Made from dried dates that have been ground into a powder, this is a sugar option that’s appears similar to traditional brown sugar. Although at first glance it seems more “natural” (there’s less processing involved), the resulting sugar from the date fruit is primarily sucrose. It also does not melt like granulated sugar, or dissolve in liquids — so it probably wouldn’t be great in your morning coffee. It may, however, work well as a “finishing sugar” on top of baked goods. Oh, and it’s expensive, too. The Bottom Line: Containing mostly concentrated sucrose, it’s not a great option.

However, since it includes the entire date (dehydrated along with the sugars), it may be a good alternative for some uses. Want to know more about dates? Check out this thorough 1993 bulletin, Date Palm Products , from The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Maple Syrup Made from the sap of maple trees (the sap is collected and then boiled down), the process is fairly similar today to many years ago. The up-side of maple syrup is that it’s significantly less processed than most other sugars — and does contain small amounts of nutrients. Then again, all of those nutrients can be easily found in other less-calorie-dense foods, and you’d have to consume a lot of maple syrup to make it worthwhile. The Bottom Line: Containing mostly sucrose, it’s best to limit your consumption of maple syrup. Wikipedia Page on Maple Syrup Maple Sugar Maple sugar is what you get if you boil down maple syrup until it’s a solid sugar, or powder. It’s about 90% sucrose (with the rest being glucose and fructose). It may, however, be significantly sweeter than regular table sugar, so you’d end up using less of it.

The Bottom Line: Containing mostly sucrose, it’s best to limit your consumption of maple sugar. Wikipedia Page on Maple Sugar Palm Sugar Made from the sap of various palm trees (much like maple syrup), powdered palm sugar can be used in a similar means as regular cane sugar. It may be marketed as “Coconut Palm Sugar,” or simply “Coconut Sugar,” though that’s misleading because the sugar doesn’t come from the coconut itself. It may also be called “Palm Honey.” I couldn’t find details on the exact type of sugar found in Palm Sugar, unfortunately (anybody have info on this?). I do like that it’s significantly less refined — some manufacturers don’t even boil it, they simply let it evaporate. One thing to watch out for, though, is that some manufacturers may “cut” the palm sugar with regular refined table sugar. My hunch is that we’ll be seeing this one more and more frequently as a “healthy alternative,” only to find out once again it doesn’t pan out. I already found one website claiming that palm sugar is good for “asthma, anemia, leprosy” and for accelerating the growth of young children. (!?!).

Another uses the slogan “Nature’s Perfect Sweetener.” Sure seems like a red flag to me. The Bottom Line: Jury’s still out, but I’m guessing it’s mostly sucrose. Fruit Juice Concentrate I get really frustrated when I see fruit juice concentrate listed as an ingredient. First, they’re not telling us which fruit is being concentrated (usually it’s apple, pear, or grape). More importantly, this is essentially as refined a sugar as any other — but it sounds healthier because hey, it comes from fruit! The trick is, if it’s sugar directly from fruit, it’s going to contain mostly fructose and sucrose. Once it’s been extracted (in the form of juice) and then concentrated (through heating), effectively all we’re left with is the isolated sugars. The Bottom Line: Don’t be fooled by the healthier-sounding name, this is nutritionally no better than regular table sugar. No Wikipedia page exists for fruit juice concentrate. Here’s the page for Juice . Honey In terms of taste, honey is hard to beat. Unfortunately, it’s about 38.5% fructose (and 31% glucose) — which means it’s a fairly similar fructose-glucose ratio to regular table sugar.

There may be added benefits to honey, especially if it’s unrefined and consumed raw. Indeed, entire books could be written on honey, so I can hardly do it justice in this short space. Having said that, if I’m going to consume honey, I’ll try to find a source that’s as close to the hive as possible. My favorite brand so far is Really Raw — it’s a creamy, rich honey that even has bits of pollen and honeycomb floating on the surface. (The downside is that it’s quite expensive). The Bottom Line: Honey can be “closer to nature,” and may have some benefits, but unfortunately it’s about as high in fuctose as regular table sugar. Wikipedia Page on Honey Invert Sugar, Inverted Sugar Syrup Unless you’re a baker, you probably won’t have invert sugar in your pantry — but you still might see it in ingredient lists. Quite simply, it’s sugar that’s had the sucrose split apart (“inverted”) into the individual glucose and fructose molecules. It’s a little sweeter than the original sugar, because the “free” fructose is sweeter than the sucrose or glucose components.

It’s often called “artificial honey.” The Bottom Line: It’s effectively the same stuff as table sugar. An Overview of Invert Sugar from A Life Less Sweet Molasses Molasses is a thick, syrupy byproduct of the refining of sugar cane or beets into table sugar. Since the whole point is to extract the sugar — and this is what’s left over — there’s significantly less sugar in this resulting syrup. There may be up to three boilings in the sugar extraction process, and the result of each produces a darker and darker molasses, with less and less remaining sugar. The molasses that comes from the last one is known as “blackstrap molasses.” Blackstrap Molasses has long been heralded as a sweetener that’s actually good for you — and I’m having hard time debunking that notion. It’s high in manganese, copper, iron, calcium, and other nutrients, while being fairly low in sugar. The taste, however, may be a turnoff for some — it’s quite strong. Personally, I like it spread on toast — adding some variety to my morning — but I certainly wouldn’t use it in my tea or coffee.

The Bottom Line: The nutrient-to-sugar ratio on molasses — especially blackstrap molasses — is far better than other sweeteners. However, molasses has such a strong, specific flavor that it may not be an acceptable substitute to many. Wikipedia Pages on Molasses and Blackstrap Molasses Blackstrap Molasses Info from “The World’s Healthiest Foods” site Corn Syrup & High Fructose Corn Syrup I’ve been saving the corn syrups for last, of course. Produced from the starch of corn, the resulting first step is usually very high in glucose (and may have a fair amount of maltose as well). Because corn syrups are produced very specifically for different requirements, I can’t really say the exact amount of glucose. However, what I can tell you is that regular corn syrup is primarily glucose. As a result, it’s less sweet than other sugars — but it also may be “less bad” for you. High fructose corn syrup, then, is corn syrup that’s had some of the glucose converted (via enzymes) into fructose.

The most common HFCS is about 55% fructose and 42% glucose (give or take) — which is nearly the same ratio of sugars that you’ll find in regular table sugars (there are other types out there, too, going all the way to about 90% fructose). In general, though, “high fructose” is somewhat of a misnomer — which is why the corn refiners’ association wants to change the name to “corn sugar.” (I’ve written about this before, taking an unpopular position , but as far as I can tell, it’s the most factual one. In the same breath, I’ll remind you once again that I don’t eat the stuff , regardless of what it’s called.) There are, of course, myriad other issues surrounding corn syrup and high fructose corn syrup. Genetically modified foods, corn subsidies, crop monocultures, big agribusiness, amount of processing… these are all serious considerations. However, from a purely nutritional standpoint, there doesn’t seem to be much difference between high fructose corn syrup and regular table sugar.

The Bottom Line: I still can’t escape the fact that as we’re learning that glucose may be less-bad for us than fructose, regular corn syrup may be a viable alternative to other sugars. Wikipedia pages on Corn Syrup and High Fructose Corn Syrup . Putting it all together What it all comes down to is this: We don’t know what we don’t know. But what we do know is that limiting added sugar intake can make a huge positive impact on your overall health. We also know that when we do use concentrated sweeteners, there’s a chance that glucose and maltose may be better choices than fructose or sucrose. But again, I stress that there really isn’t enough data yet to back that up with certainty. My hunch is that over the next few years, the nutritionists’ mantra of “sugar is sugar is sugar” will evolve and be able to become more specific. I’m guessing we’ll start focusing on intrinsic sugars (such as what’s already in that whole apple) over refined sugars (such as that apple juice concentrate), just as we’re realizing the benefits of whole grains over refined grains.

In the meantime, my suggestion is that next time you do use sugars, give barley malt, brown rice syrup, and blackstrap molasses a try. At the very least, you’ll be trying something new, which is always a good thing. — Difference Between Brown Sugar and Raw Sugar Home / Life Style / Food / Raw Material / Difference Between Brown Sugar and Raw Sugar Difference Between Brown Sugar and Raw Sugar Posted on by koshal Last updated on: February 10, 2015 Brown Sugar vs Raw Sugar The difference between brown sugar and raw sugar is distinct though, sometimes, brown sugar is branded as raw sugar and sold in the market. However, before going into the difference between brown sugar and raw sugar, you need to know what they are. We have all heard and even used brown sugar at one time or other in our kitchens but what is this raw sugar? Well, brown sugar is nothing but molasses reintroduced to white sugar thus changing its color and also flavor. Raw sugar is also brown in color and also called natural brown sugar. First crystallization of cane produces raw sugar.

It is then refined to remove molasses to finally produce white sugar that we use commonly in our daily life for sweetening our drinks or to make recipes like cakes and biscuits. Let us take a closer look at raw sugar and brown sugar. What is Raw Sugar? Raw sugar is natural and light brown in colour. To understand the type of sugar it is, let us first see how raw sugar is made. First of all, sugarcane is pressed and mixed with lime. The liquid so obtained is then reduced through simple evaporation, allowing them to crystallize. These crystals, light brown in color, are then spun in a centrifuge to allow them to separate. Finally, these crystals are left to dry on their own. These crystals have a slightly light brown color because of the presence of molasses. This is the sugar that is called raw sugar. Unlike brown sugar, one cannot hope to make raw sugar at home as there are only white and brown sugars available in the market to experiment with. What is Brown Sugar? Manufacturers use refined white sugar to make it brown sugar. This is done by reintroducing molasses, mostly keeping it to 3.5% to 6.5% by volume.

The light brown sugar contains up to 3.5% molasses. Dark brown sugar contains up to 6.5% molasses. Remember, the brown sugar so produced is not natural as opposed to common perception that it is natural. The raw sugar is first refined to get white sugar and then turned into brown sugar by adding molasses. So, as you can see, from among raw sugar, brown sugar, and white sugar, brown sugar is the type of sugar that is processed most. You can make your own brown sugar at home by adding molasses syrup to white sugar. What is the difference between Brown Sugar and Raw Sugar? • Talking of differences between brown sugar and raw sugar, raw sugar is natural while brown sugar is more artificial. • Raw sugar is natural and free from harmful chemicals and dyes. Brown sugar, as it is made from white sugar makes use of many chemicals such as formic acid, phosphoric acid, sulfur dioxide, flocculants, preservatives, bleaching agents, and viscosity modifiers. • When brown sugar is made, molasses are added.

With this addition, brown sugar gets a little more nutrients as small amounts of macro minerals (such as calcium , phosphorous, magnesium and sulfur ), small amounts of micro minerals (such as copper , manganese, iron , and zinc), and B vitamins are present in molasses. However, since the amount of molasses added is very little, the brown sugar is only a little ahead from raw sugar. • The calories of brown sugar and raw sugar is said to be the same. • When we consider the production process of both brown sugar and raw sugar, we can come to the following conclusion. Raw sugar uses the least amount of production process as it does not go through as heavy production process as brown sugar. That means, less energy is used in the production of raw sugar. Also, since the process is not lengthy, less waste is produced and also fewer chemicals are added to the product. On the contrary to this, brown sugar takes a long production process because to produce brown sugar first raw sugar and then white sugar has to be made. As a result of this lengthy production process, brown sugar produces more waste, uses more energy as well as have more chemicals. Therefore, from the two, raw sugar is the environmentally friendly product.

• Both raw, as well as brown sugars, come under different brand names having their own characteristics and properties. Whatever sugar you choose to use, you have to remember one fact. No matter what type of sugar you use, excessive use of sugar can lead to health problems such as diabetes. Sugarcane as feed T.R. Preston INTRODUCTION Research at the Cuban Institute of Animal Science in the late 1960s led to the development of molasses-based feeding systems for both cattle and pigs, which have been applied on a widespread scale, in many tropical countries (Preston and Leng, 1986). Molasses had been used previously in animal feeds, but always at relatively low levels (usually less than 20 percent of the diet). The Cuban research was the first to show that molasses could seriously be considered as an alternative to cereal grains as a means of intensifying animal production in the tropics. DEFINITIONS Molasses is a term applied to a variety of by-product feeds derived from sugar-rich crops. To avoid confusion, the different kinds of molasses that are produced by the sugarcane industry are listed in Table 1.

The Spanish names are used in the case of products derived from the “panela” industry as there are no English equivalents. From the nutritional standpoint, the major differences in the various “molasses” by-products are in the amount of soluble ash as a proportion of the total dry matter. In this respect, final molasses stands apart from the rest with an ash content between 10 and 15 percent of the dry matter. As is to be expected from the method of manufacture, “B” molasses is in a position intermediate between final and high-test molasses. The “cachaza” and “melote” from “panela” production resemble the raw cane juice and cane syrup, respectively; they differ in their higher content of impurities, mostly as protein and mineral matter complexed with “tannins” from the bark extracts used to clarify the juice. The concentration of soluble ash in the molasses derived from industrial manufacture of crystalline sugar, and the impurities in “cachaza” and “melote”, are the factors which apparently determine the degree to which these feeds can be incorporated in the diets of monogastric animals.

All the different types of molasses can be fed safely to ruminants, even at high levels (> 70 percent of the dry matter). MOLASSES AS A FEED FOR RUMINANTS It is important to distinguish between low and high level usage of all types of molasses. At low levels (<20 percent of the diet dry matter), the effect of the soluble carbohydrates in the molasses tends to be complementary rather than competitive and there appears to be little or no depression in the degree to which the basal feed resource is fermented. Beyond a concentration of 20 percent in the diet dry matter, there is increasing competition for substrate by the rumen microorganisms, with the result that the basal diet is used less and less efficiently according to the amount of molasses that is fed. When molasses accounts for more than 50 percent of the diet, the digestibility of all types of feeds that accompany the molasses is depressed often to the point of only half the value recorded when molasses is not given (Encarnación and Hughes-Jones, 1981).

These effects are obviously undesirable if the accompanying feed is composed mainly of cell wall carbohydrate: however, if the feed is rich in protein, starch or lipids-which can be digested by gastric enzymes in the small intestine-then depressing the extent to which these nutrients are fermented in the rumen becomes an advantage to the host animal. Final molasses as a supplement It is frequently claimed that small amounts of molasses in a roughage-based diet stimulate rumen fermentation. However, this appears to be unlikely in view of recent evidence that sources of digestible cell walls, rather than soluble carbohydrate, are the most appropriate supplements for this purpose (e.g. Gutierrez and Elliott, 1984; Silva and Orskov, 1985). The most appropriate role for small amounts of molasses in ruminant diets is as a vehicle for other nutrients (e.g. urea and minerals). A drought feeding strategy based on the use of liquid molasses supplements containing from 8 to 10 percent urea is now an established practice in Australia (Nicol et al., 1984) and has been introduced sucessfully in Africa (Preston and Leng, 1986).

The incorporation of urea and other nutrients in molasses-based (multi-nutritional) blocks promises to be an even more attractive technology, especially for smallholder-village farmers, for supplementation of locally available crop residues which are of low digestibility and also deficient in fermentable nitrogen (Leng and Preston, 1984; Sansoucy et al., 1986). Final molasses as the basis of the diet The Cuban research in the late 1960s had, as its objective, the development of livestock feeding systems in which molasses was the principal ingredient. At the outset it was decided that molasses should be fed in its original liquid state in order to reduce processing costs and to facilitate transport and storage. The successful development of the high molasses-fattening system for cattle (Preston et al., 1967a) exemplifies the application of the basic principles of ruminant digestion and metabolism on low-N, high-CHO feeds, namely: optimization of rumen fermentation by supplying fermentable-N (urea) and some high quality green forage; balancing the nutrients available for metabolism, by providing bypass nutrients.

The original system utilized forages such as Elephant grass, pangola grass and often sugarcane tops as the roughage source. Forage was restricted (0.8 kg dry matter/100 kg liveweight) to encourage the animal to consume high levels of molasses. The urea level was set at 2.5 percent of the fresh weight of the molasses to provide a ratio of fermentable nitrogen to carbohydrate close to the theoretical requirements of efficiently growing rumen microorganisms. Sulphur supplementation was not required as sulphur dioxide is used in clarification of cane juice and residual sulphur is concentrated in the molasses. In the first widespread commercial application of the feeding system, fishmeal (Peruvian) was the bypass protein supplement. The dramatic effect of this supplement in raising animal productivity on a molasses-based diet is shown in Figure 1. The data in Tables 2 and 3 summarize the results obtained when the molasses fattening programme was commercialized in large scale feedlots and under conditions of restricted grazing on State farms.

Subsequent developments in the use of molasses-based diets have been directed to the use of: high protein forages which supplied much, and sometimes all, of the bypass protein as well as the roughage characteristics (Figure 3, Tables 1 and 5); Supplementation with poultry litter (Figure 2). There is evidence that on molasses-based diets, poultry litter influences the pattern of VFA formation by increasing the proportions of propionate and decreasing the butyrate (Fernandez and Hughes-Jones, 1981; Marrufo, 1984). This would be a partial explanation of the improved growth rates and feed conversions associated with the use of poultry litter in molasses-based diets (Figure 2) see also Meyreles, 1984 and Herrera, 1984). OTHER TYPES OF MOLASSES High-test molasses High-test molasses differs from final molasses in that it is the concentrated sugarcane juice, from which no sugar has been extracted, but which has been clarified and filtered (to remove impurities) and partially inverted (conversion of sucrose to its constituent reducing sugars, glucose and fructose), to prevent crystallization of the sucrose.

It is thus richer in total sugars and has a much lower content of soluble ash than final molasses, which as the name implies is the residual solubles of the cane juice after most of the sucrose has been extracted. High-test molasses is not laxative and gives rise to faeces which have normal consistency. The successful feeding of pigs with liquid diets in which high-test molasses was the only source of carbohydrate, and contributed up to 70 percent of the ration dry matter, was first reported from Cuba (Preston et al., 1968). High-test molasses supported similar rates of liveweight gain as final molasses in one experiment with fattening steers in Cuba (Preston et al., 1967b). “Cachaza” and “melote” (sugarcane scums) “Cachaza” is the flocculated matter and associated cane juice removed from the boiling cane juice during the artisanal production of “panela”. Its composition is similar to that of cane juice differing only in the higher percentage of protein and minerals and other substances (including tannins) present in the bark extracts added to aid the flocculation process.

It may be fed fresh but usually it is concentrated to about 60 percent solids so as to give a stable product which can be stored (the fresh “cachaza” begins to ferment after 24 h). The concentrated product is called “melote” in Latin America. There seem to be no reports in the scientific literature concerning the nutritive value of “cachaza” or “melote” in animal feeds; however, they are widely used at least in Latin America as a feed for pigs and for the mules that traditionally transport the feed for pigs and for the mules that traditionally transport the sugarcane from the fields. Practical observations are that they satisfactorily replace cereal grains in the diet of finishing pigs but cause diarrhoea in younger pigs and are not suitable for lactating sows (T.R. Preston, unpublished observations). In Colombia, steers given free access to “melote”/urea (2.5 percent urea), and restricted quantities of rice polishings, poultry litter, sugarcane tops and foliage from the legume tree, Gliricidia sepium, had average liveweight gains of 800 g/d (T.R. Preston and R.

Botero, unpublished data). METABOLIC DISEASES ON MOLASSES-FEEDING SYSTEMS Three metabolic diseases may occur in cattle and sheep fed diets in which molasses is used as a supplement (as a vehicle for urea) or as the basis of the diet. These are: urea toxicity, molasses toxicity and bloat. Urea toxicity With ad libitum feeding of molasses/urea mixtures, urea intakes may reach as high as 300 g/d (e.g. in a 500 kg dairy cow consuming 10 kg/d of the molasses/urea mixture). Even in these cases, there is rarely any risk of urea toxicity since the sugars in molasses and ammonia from urea are quickly used in microbial cell growth. Animals which have never previously consumed urea can be safely permitted free access to mixtures of molasses containing up to 3 percent urea without fear of toxicity. The principle underlying the use of molasses with 8–10 percent urea is that the high urea concentration inhibits consumption of the mixture (Figure 4).

Toxicity will only occur if the urea is not uniformly mixed or if the mixture has a high water content which may encourage the animal to “drink” rather than “lick” the mixture. Molasses toxicity This used to be the most serious problem associated with ad libitum molasses feeding. For example, in the first year following the introduction of the molasses/urea fattening system in Cuba, mortality and emergency slaughter rates in a 10 000 head feedlot increased from 0.1 percent and 0.4 percent (when a forage-based diet was fed) to 1 percent and 3 percent respectively, when the diet was changed to high levels of molasses/urea (see Table 2). Cattle suffering from molasses toxicity salivate, stand apart in a “dejected” posture, usually with their head lowered; and frequently are found “leaning” against the fence or feed trough. Invariably, eye-sight is affected and often the animal is blind. When disturbed they have an unsteady and uncoordinated gait and this led the “cowboys” in Cuba to refer to the affected animal as “borracho” (i.e. drunk!!).

The nervous symptoms and blindness, that were a feature of molasses toxicity, indicated damage to the brain and it was subsequently shown (Verdura and Zamora, 1970) that the clinical syndrome was indistinguishable from that of cerebro-cortical necrosis (CCN) also known as polioencephalomalacia (Edwin et al., 1979). The necrosis in the brain is readily seen and this allows rapid diagnosis. The cause of the necrosis is likely to be a decrease in the energy supply to the brain either because of an absolute deficiency of alimentary thiamine, binding of thiamine analogues produced in the rumen and/or through the action of thiaminase in the rumen (Edwin et al., 1979); or a deficiency of glucose (Losada and Preston, 1973). Treatment and prevention In high-molasses feeding systems, it is usual to restrict the supply of forage (either to stimulate molasses intake or because of the greater cost of forage compared with molasses).

Inadequacies in the forage supply, either in quantity or “quality”, appear to be the main causative factors of molasses toxicity. Thus, the incidence of molasses toxicity was less when wheat or barley straw, rather than sorghum forage or maize silage, were used as the forage sources in molasses-based feedlots (T.R. Preston, unpublished data). Furthermore, there have been no reports of toxicity when high protein forages (e.g. leucaena, and cassava and sweet potato leaves) have been used. Equally, the feeding of palatable forage with a high protein content appears to be the best cure for affected animals. The recent developments in the molasses feeding system have emphasized the technical and economic advantages of giving high protein forages, especially from leguminous trees like leucaena, gliricidia and erythrina, as a combined source of both “roughage” and “bypass” protein (Preston and Botero, 1986). Such procedures are also likely to offer the most cost-effective solution for molasses toxicity.

The above discussion emphasizes the critical role of management in any feeding system where economic constraints dictate a less than optimum degree of supplementation. Bloat Bloat, which is the retention in the rumen of gas, either free or entrapped in foam, occurs in almost all feeding systems. It is more frequent in the diet of other carbohydrate sources which have little or no fibre but which are highly digestible, such as raw sugar (MacLeod et al., 1968) and maize grain (Fermin et al., 1984). PRACTICAL FEEDING SYSTEMS FOR MONOGASTRIC ANIMALS USING MOLASSES (FINAL, HIGH-TEST AND “MELOTE”) Two approaches are possible: Molasses as a component of traditional feeds Including molasses in conventional cereal grain-based feeds is established technology, but has limited economic significance in developing countries because of the relatively small proportion (5 to 10 percent of the feed) of molasses than can be accepted by most mixing systems in conventional feed mills.

Molasses as the basis of new feeding systems Final and “B” molasses have been the basis of commercial pig diets in Cuba since the late 1960s (Perez, 1986). The molasses is fed in liquid form, partially diluted with water and is combined with a protein supplement usually of saccharomyces, yeast and fishmeal. The most widescale example of molasses usage is as a component of a “soup” prepared by boiling urban organic refuse (mostly food and vegetable wastes) and using this enriched with “B” molasses as the only feed for pigs (Perez, 1986). Although technically feasible (e.g. Perez et al., 1968), there has been no commercial application of molasses feeding as the basis of diets for poultry, mainly because of management difficulties caused by the viscous nature of the molasses. REFERENCES Edwin, E.E., Makson, L.M., Shreeve, J., Jackman, R. and Carroll, P.J. 1979 Diagnostic aspects of cerebrocortical necrosis. Veterinary Record, 104:4–8. Encarnación, C.

and Hughes-Jones, M. 1981 The rate of degradability of feeds in rumen bags in animals receiving diets with or without molasses. Tropical Animal Production, 6:362–363. Fermin, D., Fermin, R., Pila, A. and Mena, A. 1984 Sugarcane juice as a substitute for maize and molasses in diets for fattening pigs. Tropical Animal Production, 9:271–274. Fernandez, A. and Hughes-Jones, M. 1981 Rumen fermentation and rumen function in bulls receiving a basic diet of molasses/urea supplemented with poultry litter, sweet potato forage or wheat bran. Tropical Animal Production, 6:360. Ffoulkes, D. and Preston, T.R. 1978 Cassava or sweet potato forage as combined sources of protein and roughage in molasses based diets: effect of supplementation with soybean meal. Tropical Animal Production, 3:186–192. Gutierrez, E. and Elliott, R.

1984 Interacción digestiva de la pulpa de henequén (Agave fourcroydes) y el pasto estrella de Africa (Cynodon plectostachyus) In: Alternativas y valor nutritivo de algunos recursos alimenticios destinados a producción animal. Informe provisional No. 16. International Foundation for Science, Stockholm, pp 229–246. Herrera, F. 1984 Evaluación de diferentes niveles de Leucaena leucocephala en dietas basadas en melaza/urea, con y sin gallinaza, en la engorda de novillos In: Alternativas y valor nutritivo de algunos recursos alimenticios destinados a producción animal. Informe provisional No. 16 International Foundations for Science: Stockholm pp 199–204. Losada, H. and Preston, T.R. 1973 Effect of forage on performance, content of the reticulo-rumen and VFA in rumen and caecum of calves fed diets based on molasses-urea. Revista Cubana ciencia Agricola (English edition), 7:185. Leng, R.A.

and Preston, T.R. 1984 Nutritional strategies for the utilization of agro-industrial by-products by ruminants and extension of the principles and technologies to the small farmer in Asia. In: Proceedings 5th World Conference on Animal Production, Tokyo, pp 310–318. MacLeod, N.A., Preston, T.R., Lassota, L.A., Willis, M.B. and Velazquez, M. 1968 Mieles y azúcares como fuentes energéticas para puercos. Revista Cubana Ciencia Agricola, 2:205–210. Marrufo, D. 1984 La Leucaena leucocephala: su productividad en la zona henequenera de Yucatán y su uso como suplemento en diets a base de melaza/urea. Tesis de Maestria, Universidad de Yucatán. Meyreles, L. 1984 La gallinaza como suplemento en dietas de melaza/urea para el ganado bovino.

In: Alternativas y valor nutritivo de algunos recursos alimenticios destinados a producción animal. Informe provisional No. 16 International Foundation for Science, Stockholm, pp 147–158. Meyreles, L., Pound, B. and Preston, T.R. 1982 The use of Leucaena leucocephala or sugarcane tops as sources of forage in cattle diets based on molasses/urea, supplemented with chicken litter and/or wheat bran. Tropical Animal Production, 7:92–97. Meyreles, L. and Preston, T.R.1982 The role of poultry litter in molasses/urea diets for the fattening of cattle. Tropical Animal Production, 7:138–141. Morciego, S., Muñoz, F. and Preston, T.R. 1970 Commercial fattening of bulls with molasses/urea and restricted grazing. Revista Cubana de Ciencia Agricola (English edition), 4:97–101. MuÑoz, F., Morciego, F.

and Preston, T.R.1970 La ceba commercial de toros con miel/urea, harina de pescado y forraje restringido en condiciones de cebadero. Revista Cubana de Ciencia Agricola, 4:99–104. Nicol, D.C., Venamore, P.C. and Beasley, R.C. Fortified molasses 1984 systems for beef properties. Animal Production in Australia, 15:216–219. Perez, R., Preston, T.R. and Willis, M.B. 1968 The replacement of cereals by sugar or molasses for broilers raised on wire or litter. Revista Cubana de Ciencia Agricola (English edition), 2:101–108. Perez, R. 1986 Molasses as feed for non-ruminants. In: FAO Expert Consultation on Sugarcane as Feed (Editors: R. Sansoucy, G. Aarts and T.R. Preston) FAO, Rome. Preston, T.R., Elias, A., Willis, M.B.

and Sutherland, T.M. 1967a Intensive beef production from molasses and urea. Nature, 216:721. Preston, T.R. Willis, M.B. and Elias, A. 1967b Intensive beef production from sugarcane by-products. 2. Comparison between normal and invert molasses as a supplement to forage or concentrates. Revista Cubana Ciencia Agricola (English edition), 1:41–48. Preston T.R., MacLeod, N.A., Lassota, L., Willis, M.B. and Velasquez, M. 1968 Sugarcane products as energy sources for pigs. Nature, 219:727–728. Preston, T.R., and Willis, M.B. 1974 Intensive beef production (2nd Edition). Pergamon Press. Preston, T.R. and Leng, R.A. 1986 Matching Livestock Systems with Available Feed Resources. International Livestock Centre for Africa, Addis Ababa, pp 331. Preston T.R.

and Botero, R. 1986 Resultados parciales de Programa CIPAV (Enero-Abril 1986) Fundación del Desarrollo Integral del Valle del Cauca, Cali, pp 23. Sansoucy, R., Aarts, G. and Leng, R.A. 1986 Molasses-urea blocks as multinutrient supplements for ruminants. In: FAO Expert Consultation on Sugarcane as Feed (Editors: R. Sansoucy, G. Aarts, and T.R. Preston) FAO, Rome. Silva, A. and ørskov, E.R. 1985 Effect of unmolassed sugar beet pulp on the rate of straw degradation in the rumens of sheep given barley straw. Proceedings Nutrition Society 44:50A Silvestre, R., MacLeod, N.A. and Preston, T.R. 1977 Voluntary intake and liveweight gain of cattle given chopped sugarcane and solutions of molasses containing different concentrations of urea. Tropical Animal Production 2:1–12. Verdura, T.

and Zamora, F. 1970 Cerebro-cortical necrosis in beef cattle fed high levels of molasses. Revista Cubana Ciencia Agricola (English edition), 4:209–212. Figure 1: Addition of fish meal to a basal diet of ad libitum molasses/urea and restricted forage dramatically improves growth rate and feed conversion of cattle in Cuba. Figure 2: In a cattle fattening diet based on ad libitum molasses, sugarcane tops and wheat bran (1 kg/day), urea was a more effective source of fermentable-N than poultry litter. Poultry litter stimulated growth rate when added to the diet (with urea), which was apparently adequate in fermentable-N. Figure 3: Contrasting effects of legume and grass as the roughage supplement in a diet based on ad libitum molasses/urea with or without supplements of wheat bran (1 kg/day) and/or poultry litter (1.5 kg/day). Figure 4: Intakes of steers (250 kg) given free access to chopped sugarcane and molasses with different concentrations of urea. Table 1.

Sugar-rich by-products derived from the processing of sugarcane Process T.R. Preston En los países productores de caña, la melaza es el nombre genérico que se da a una serie de productos y subproductos con gran contenido de azúcar, que van desde la melaza de mejor calidad, pasando por las clases “A” y “B” hasta la melaza “C” o “final”, que se producen en las etapas sucesivas del proceso actual de fabricación del azúcar. En la producción de azúcar no centrifugado (denominado panela y gur en América Latina y el subcontinente indio, respectivamente), los subproductos son la cachaza apartada del jugo hirviente después de haber añadido un agente de floculación para eliminar la materia proteínica y mineral contaminante. En América Latina, la cachaza puede concentrarse para producir un producto parecido a la melaza denominado “melote”. Puede utilizarse todo tipo de melaza en la dieta de los rumiantes.

La suplementación es decisiva para lograr niveles altos de productividad, y debe proporcionar (i) los nutrientes complementarios necesarios para la actividad de los microorganismos del rumen, (ii) los estímulos físicos necesarios para lograr un funcionamiento adecuado del rumen, (iii) nutrientes sobrepasantes para equilibrar los productos de digestión del rumen, con arreglo a las necesidades del animal. En la práctica, estas necesidades pueden satisfacerse con menor costo añadiendo urea en la melaza (25 g urea/kg melaza) y suministrando cantidades limitadas de un forraje con alto contenido de proteínas (por ejemplo las hojas de un árbol leguminoso), que puede ser al mismo tiempo una fuente de nutrientes para el rumen y para el animal.

Los productos de fermentación de la melaza en el rumen padecen un desequilibrio particularmente acusado de precursores de glucosa (baja proporción de propionato y alta de butitato) que pueden ser un factor inductor de desórdenes metabólicos (toxicidad de la melaza) que provoquen necrosis cerebral y la falta de idoneidad de una dieta a base de melaza para la producción de leche. La alimentación con gallinaza aumenta la productividad animal y la eficiencia de los piensos en las dietas a base de melaza, al parecer porque cambia la estructura de los ácidos grasos volátiles hacia proporciones más elevadas de propionato. En el caso de los cerdos y las aves, las tasas de rendimiento (y la humedad de los excrementos) están en función directa de la proporción de sacarosa y/o azúcares reductores en la melaza. Los mejores resultados se obtienen con melaza rica y los peores con las melazas finales.

Se utilizan comercialmente sistemas de alimentación a base de melaza con los cerdos, pero no con las aves de corral. The Perfect Pantry®: Brown sugar (Recipe: Irish soda bread) The Perfect Pantry® Brown sugar (Recipe: Irish soda bread) We have an elementary school science teacher in the family, so there is no excuse for the ignorance I am about to confess to you. A few months ago, Ted and I found a jar of hard-as-a-rock brown sugar on the shelves of The Perfect Pantry. (This is not the embarrassing part. Well, okay, it is embarrassing, but not from a science point of view.) How could we get that solid sugar out of the jar? Chip away at it with a knife? Dangerous. Melt it in the microwave? Hot sugar — very dangerous. And then I remembered that there was something which, when placed in a jar of hardened sugar, would restore the sugar's moisture and fluffiness. Eureka! I put a slice of whole wheat bread into the jar, sealed the top, and left it overnight. In the morning, the bread was hard as a rock, but the brown sugar was light and fluffy, completely restored to health.

To me, this was a miracle. How did the moisture pass from the bread to the sugar? Would something else (an apple? a damp paper towel?) do just as well? I can't explain how or why, but I can tell you that the bread trick really works. (Science teachers and other readers, please help!) Brown sugar — the type we buy in the supermarket — is nothing more than granulated, usually refined, white sugar with molasses added (or containing residual molasses from the refining process). Light brown sugar contains 3.5 percent molasses; dark brown has up to 6.5 percent. The darker the color, the stronger the taste. You can substitute one cup of firmly packed brown sugar for one cup of granulated sugar in most recipes. In my pantry I keep three types of brown sugar: light and dark (Domino or no-name store brand), from my local market, and turbinado , a chunkier raw sugar which has been partially processed, where only the surface molasses has been washed off. It has a blond color and mild brown sugar flavor, and is often used in tea and other beverages, and as a crunchy topping for cookies.

In England we've been served demerara sugar, a light brown crystal, with tea and on oatmeal. Use the light brown for s'mores cupcakes and flourless banana cake ; dark brown for balsamic fudge drops and fruitcake ; and whatever you've got for glazed fish , barbecue sauce , and muffins . And do keep a slice of bread handy, just in case your carefully stored leftover brown sugar decides to turn to stone. Irish soda bread My cooking friend Pauline, a faithful Pantry reader, came to visit last week and brought The Book Club Cook Book, by Judy Gelman and Vicki Levy Krupp. Each suggested book group reading is matched with a recipe. This one accompanied Frank McCourt's Angela's Ashes, a powerful book about growing up poor in Ireland. Add half a cup of currants, if you wish. Makes 2 loaves. Ingredients

Question: What is the name for sugar containing between 3.5% and 6.5% molasses?
Answer: Brown Sugar