The second fundamental assumption I am challenging (and which has been confirmed in a variety of studies from the last five years) is the assumption that LB SF has a latency period.
This "myth" has been repeatedly echoed time and again. If you're an observant reader, you'll notice that most bakers will tell you it takes two days to create a culture and then two weeks for LB SF to "drop" into the mix. All of this has been based upon one finding by Stolz et al. years and years ago.
This is simply not true.
Under non-sterile conditions and under optimal processing-conditions (which I keep repeating and repeating until I turn blue in the face), LB SF will occur after one refreshment. Problem with LB SF is, it requires a sub-dominant microflora to be present for it to really do well and become dominant.
Most schema that involve the creation of a starter do so at sub-optimal conditions, and the establishment of LB SF hence takes longer. These "normal" way of creating and building a starter is inefficient because it assumes that (i) LB SF takes two weeks to get going (remember time means nothing to these organisms; only temperature does, which actively changes their implied energy-state and "sense" of time), and (ii) most recommend process-parameters that would decrease the presence of LB SF in a continually-maintained starter (over 3 - 5 generations). That is, the temperature and inoculation percentage are usually much too low and much to high, respectively, to establish LB SF.
Let us arrive at the truth and make better bread.