HOMEBREW Digest #4818 Fri 05 August 2005

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


          Northern  Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
Visit http://www.northernbrewer.com  to show your appreciation!
               Or call them at 1-800-681-2739

    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

  Re: Experience with Safale US-56? (Bob Tower)
  Re: hazy wort from maris otter? ("Thomas T. Veldhouse")
  Advanced Homebrewing Course - THANK YOU! ("Lemcke, Keith")
  Ballantine's (Jeff Renner)
  US56 Experience ("Dan Listermann")
  Response 2: FOY- 2005-Mike Racette ("Rob Moline")
  Response- FOY,05- comments & a question in dropping/rousing. ("Rob Moline")
  Fuggle Plant Has Dried Up ("Mark Wiand")
  highly attenuative yeasts, and quantity of bottling sugar? (leavitdg)
  Apple cidery taste (Ted Teuscher)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The HBD Logo Store is now open! * * http://www.hbd.org/store.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Suppport this service: http://hbd.org/donate.shtml * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Thank you, Drs. Cone, Fischborn, Waldrop, Lemcke, & * * Powell! Fortnight of Yeast Question Sumbission is now * * closed. Please save further questions for next year. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!! To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!** IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to the digest as we cannot reach you. We will not correct your address for the automation - that's your job. HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there. The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit. More information is available by sending the word "info" to req@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning, and Spencer Thomas
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 00:34:29 -0700 From: Bob Tower <tower at cybermesa.com> Subject: Re: Experience with Safale US-56? Thomas T. Veldhouse was wondering about the new dry version of Chico ale yeast, Safale US-56 and how it compares to Wyeast 1056. I have split a small batch of California pale ale into 3 samples and pitched them with Safale US-56, White Labs WLP001 and Wyeast 1056. With the exception of pitching rate, all other factors were kept the same. They've been in primary for about 10 days. I'm going to drop to temperature to 40 F. for a few days and then force carbonate the samples. At the September meeting (Sept 13) of my local homebrew club I will be conducting a double blind taste test with the 3 samples. I will post here a detailed account of the brewing procedure as well as the results of the tasting. I am anxious to taste the results. I am keeping an open mind but if I had to guess as to the results I would think that all 3 would taste remarkably similar. Bob Tower / Los Angeles, CA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 07:10:33 -0500 From: "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy at veldy.net> Subject: Re: hazy wort from maris otter? Aron, >chilled with immersion chiller (took longer than in the winter due to >warmer water in pipes)~20-30 minutes? > > First, I would try to decrease the chilling time. I used to see problems with chill haze when I used an immersion chiller on my beers, especially in the summer. I use a Therminator now and my entire wort is cooled in 5 minutes or so. I think the rapid and complete cooling of the wort is a key factor. It does seem that Maris Otter is more prone to being senstive to your cooling method. I would also encourage you to get a complete hot break before you add your hops. For me, that is an additional 15 to 20 minutes before the first addition of hops. The indicator of a good hot break is that the foam levels suddenly receded and virtually disappear. Tom Veldhouse Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 14:24:43 -0400 From: "Lemcke, Keith" <klemcke at siebelinstitute.com> Subject: Advanced Homebrewing Course - THANK YOU! The staff of Siebel Institute of Technology & Fort Lewis College would like to thank the two dozen students of the recently-completed 2005 Advanced Homebrewing Course for all their enthusiasm and support! We hope you had a great time learning the fine art of brewing from Chris White, Randy Mosher and Chris Graham, and that you enjoyed the hospitality of the brewers of Durango, Colorado. A BIG thank you goes out to all the staff of SKA Brewing, Durango Brewing, Steamworks Brewing and Carver Brewing for once again rolling out the red carpet for our guests, once again proving that Durango is America's most beer-friendly town! The next Advanced Homebrewing Course will be held in the summer of 2006, so watch our web site for the announcement of the dates. If you want to be informed directly of the 2006 course dates, just send an e-mail to me at klemcke at siebelinstitute.com with your request and I will add you to the list. Keith Lemcke Vice-President Siebel Institute of Technology Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 20:11:55 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <jsrenner at umich.edu> Subject: Ballantine's Brewers I was just perusing my bookmarks and found this great site on Ballantine's Ales http://www.falstaffbrewing.com/ballantine_ale.htm Enjoy! Jeff - --- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, jsrenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943 ***Please note new address*** Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 20:44:26 -0400 From: "Dan Listermann" <dan at listermann.com> Subject: US56 Experience I fermented 15 gallons of cream ale each, US56, Nottingham and Coopers in side by side in a room at about 75 F. The Coopers was fine. the Nottingham seems to have thrown some fusels and the US56 had a slight but noticeable solvent aroma. This is just a data point. I am using Coopers until the weather breaks. Dan Listermann Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 22:15:02 -0500 From: "Rob Moline" <jethrogump at mchsi.com> Subject: Response 2: FOY- 2005-Mike Racette From: "Mike Racette" Subject: Fortnight Of Yeast, 2005 Can you please discuss the advantages/disadvantages of pitching onto an existing yeast cake (assuming the cake, and previous beer, smelled and tasted clean). Specifically, I have seen it argued that while there may be obvious advantages such as no starter prep, less cleaning, and perhaps a shorter lag time, there may be negative effects created due to too many old or dead yeast cells, or perhaps maybe even problems with over-pitching? How might using an existing yeast cake affect the taste and quality of the resulting beer. Mike, I believe that in some instances there may be a benefit in placing fresh wort on top of an existing yeast slurry. You are correct in stating that there may be an advantage in terms of lag phase, particularly if the beer has not been sitting on top of the yeast for a long period of time. However, the effects that you see are likely to be dependent on the yeast strain and the characteristics of the previous fermentation. For example, high gravity or high alcoholic fermentations can leave the yeast severely stressed. Such yeast will invariable perform poorly as there is likely to be a number of dead cells which could influence the clarity, foam and pH of the subsequent fermentation (due to products of autolysis). The wort utilized in the subsequent fermentation may also need to be adjusted to accommodate the differing population. This may be hard to achieve without having a detailed knowledge of the yeast strain. For a dried yeast inoculum the yeast is in perfect condition, highly vital and well aerated and contains enough lipids within the cell wall to achieve the required number of cell divisions. Yeast which has been through a fermentation will generally be depleted in sterols (as well as other compounds such as glycogen) and may not be able to produce daughter cells, or if they do, these cells may be fermentatively 'weaker' than normal. The wort may therefore require a higher degree of aeration to provide enough oxygen for sterol synthesis. The subject of cell division also raises a serious issue as yeast generally divide approximately 3 times during a fermentation (again this is strain specific and dependent on extrinsic factors). Consequently, you are correct in stating that by simply adding beer onto the yeast you are effectively overpitching. For example instead of starting with 15million (1.5E+07) cells/ml wort you would be adding around 120million (1.2E+08) cells/ml. Couple this with an additional 3 fold increase in the new fermentation and theoretically you could end up with almost 1000 million (1E+09) cells/ml ! In practice the population is not likely to get quite this high, but it would still lead to major flavor variations. One other issue with reusing yeast is the possibility of transferring contaminants. Bacteria present in low numbers at the end of one fermentation will rapidly overtake the yeast if pitched into fresh wort, due simply to shorter division times. To summarize, it is possible to achieve good, clean fermentations by reusing yeast. However, given the number of variables involved (not least the strain and type of fermentation performed), it's difficult to predict the characteristics of a beer produced by repitching a yeast culture. Suffice to say that without adjustments to a number of fermentation conditions the subsequent fermentation may not be as predictable or reliable as when using fresh yeast. Chris - -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.0/63 - Release Date: 8/3/2005 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 22:22:08 -0500 From: "Rob Moline" <jethrogump at mchsi.com> Subject: Response- FOY,05- comments & a question in dropping/rousing. From: "-S" Subject: FOY, comments & a question in dropping/rousing. Sincere thanks (in advance) for all the great info so far on FOY. I'm only sorry that time doesn't permit greater participation. Hat's off to Chris Powell and Alan Meeker - I learned something I'll probably be puzzling over for the next several years, and there is no greater gift than a good puzzle. Dave Burley brings up a point that caught my eye early on ... > Subject: Further Response: FOY, 05-Crabtree effect and Overflow Metabolism DB> Clayton Cone has explained that if have more than 0.2% glucose in our DB> starters [...] CC> Response: CC> I am glad that you asked this question because I did not wish to imply CC> that there would be no cell wall improvement even in the presence of CC> oxygen at >0.2% sugar. When the wort has more than >0.2% sugar, the CC> function of the O2 is to assist the yeast in producing lipids. [...] > Clayton Cone This puzzles me. The Crabtree effect is the repression of respiration in the presence of *GLUCOSE* concentration above a critical threshold. The reference to "sugars" generally implies that wort will supress respiration until the very end of fermentation however I see no evidence that the major wort sugars, maltose, maltotriose, can produce Crabtree effect. Malting&Brewing Science vol2, pp593-594 dicusses Crabtree threshold as 0.4% w/v of glucose table and 17.6 indicates that other monosaccharides (fructose, mannose, galactose) repress respiration but less effectively than glucose. Baking yeast (also a Saccharomyces cereviae which exhibit Crabtree) is grown in an aerobic sucrose media which does not supress respiration. Normal 12P all malt wort has roughly 1%(1P) of monosaccharides with glucose as the most prominant and another roughly 7P of fermentable polysaccharides. I assume the Crabtree effect ceases to be a factor when the monosaccharide level drops below the threshold. If monsaccharides are fermented first then Crabtree ceases to influence yeast metabolism after about 10% of attenuation has taken place for all-malt wort. This issue has a practical brewing consequence and leads to a question. Homebrewers often use one of two distinct methods of yeast "rousing" to improve attenuation with finicky top fermenting yeasts and both seem somewhat effective. The traditional British practice of "dropping" or transfer of fermenting wort at 24-36 hours into fermentation (M&BS pp 668-670) is practiced by some and this certainly causes some oxygen inclusion. Alternatively many Homebrewers practice some form of "rousing" by shaking and stirring airlocked fermenters. My hunch is that "dropping" aeration during active fermentation improves yeast sterol levels to some extent, but I also expect that Crabtree repression of respiration is absent after 24 hours of fermentation, so perhaps another impact, of "dropping" is to permit mitochondrial development by limited respiration for some flavor advantage. Please comment; what is the expected impact of this "dropping" aeration ? The second form of "rousing" presents another question; how does the shaking of air-locked fermenters late into fermentation improve attenuation ? A dubious but common explanations for this are that shaking "resuspends" flocculated yeast or else mixes the remaining fermentables bringing these into greater yeast contact. Neither explanation is satisfactory. Yeast flocculate when growth conditions are absent and generally will not deflocculate until growth conditions are re-established. Also no significant "fermentable" gradient is likely to appear in a 10 gallon fermenter. My hunch is that the removal of CO2 by shaking causes the improvement attenuation. Please comment. p.s. The original reply by Dr.Cone regarding Crabtree included a typo that cell walls rather than cell membranes benefit from the oxygen product sterols. Cell walls are the mannose-protein "skeleton" covered with chitinous bud scars, while cell membranes are the soft lipid-bilayer structure that we all (should have) learned about in HS biology [ see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid_bilayer ]. -SteveA Response: Good points.....I do not really have any solid numbers on this but different sugars can effect the yeasts in different ways. The Crabtree effect is also probably better explained as the promotion of one metabolic pathway (fermentation) over another (respiration). Saccharomyces is a wonderful little critter in that, as far as I can recall, it is the only yeast species which is truly fermentative, most of the other fermentative yeasts tend to require some O2, or other growth promoters, in order to continue fermentation. True that Saccharomyces needs a boost now and then but it is different. Moreover, most Saccharomyces ferment as fast as they can, while the other fermentative yeasts tend to slow down when fermenting. The Glucose repression effect is something different from the Crabtree effect, and also much more. The Crabtree effect is something that happens at the expense of respiration rather than the complete repression of respiration as by glucose. From an experimental point of view if you have plenty of sugar and excess of air but the yeast still makes ethanol then it is Crabtree positive, if ethanol is present but only in trace amounts then Crabtree negative, if you remove the air then you find out of the yeast can ferment. There are genera of yeast that cannot ferment and these really are not so interesting. Again this is a bit of a generalisation; everything going on is a dynamic system so there will always be what seems to be conflicting. With the "dropping" you are probably right. Once the glucose is gone there will be modifications to the mitochondrial form and function that allows something new to happen (including some limited respiratory activity). However, even when glucose repressed the mitochondria are still functioning and play an essential role in the fermentation. Yeasts devoid of mitochondrial input are not attractive in brewing. "Dropping aeration" is doing what you think it is, young fresh yeast are introduced along with air into the fermentation and things should go well. It is also possible to introduce this to sluggish/stuck fermentations as a way of finishing them off properly. It comes down to healthy yeast, and while Saccharomyces is a wonderful hard-working, little friend it does do better if well looked after. Again probably correct with the explanation of rousing effect on the fermentation. Release of CO2 from the liquid into the air and then out the air-lock will help the yeast continue to ferment better. The other effects of mixing the yeast may also help but are probably less important as the CO2 removal. Industrial brewers tend to have methods for aiding the removal of CO2 from the fermenting beer, through a process called "nucleation". Again most of the sterol found in yeast is located on the membranes, both intracellular and extracellular, however sterols probably get associated with the cell wall, again diagrams tend to do an injustice to the dynamic nature of the beast. Forbes - -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.0/63 - Release Date: 8/3/2005 Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 08:34:15 -0500 From: "Mark Wiand" <mark.wiand at metc.state.mn.us> Subject: Fuggle Plant Has Dried Up Hello All, One of my first year Fuggle plants has just dried up on me. I wasn't watering well enough, and now all of the leaves are crackled and curled due to the dry weather here in Minnesota recently (I don't think it was a disease). It was about five feet tall. I've tried watering it, but it doesn't respond. So is it completely dead (including the roots)? Is there any hope that I'll get a new shoot this year or next year? Would it help if I cut down the dried-up bine? Thanks, Mark Richfield, Minnesota Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 15:09:04 -0400 From: leavitdg at plattsburgh.edu Subject: highly attenuative yeasts, and quantity of bottling sugar? I have not used wlp007 (Dry English Ale Yeast) for some time, but just noticed that both the pig and the bottles into which I placed the the brew are both HIGHLY carbonated. And, this led me to wonder: when bottling with a highly attenuative yeast, should one take this into account and use just a touch less corn sugar? In other words, the 3/4 cup (for bottles), for example, may be just slightly too high for a yeast that is going to eat proportionately more of it up, no? BTW, I really like what this yeast does. Darrell Happy Brewing! Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 13:51:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Ted Teuscher <t_teuscher at yahoo.com> Subject: Apple cidery taste I brewed 10 gallons of an american pale ale a couple months ago. This beer has a VERY strong apple cidery taste to it. No signs of contamination were present when kegging. I fermented the beer for 6 weeks at 68F and dry hopped with cascade for 3 weeks. I prepared my yeast starter (2 smack packs of american ale wyeast)using some previously prepared wort with yeast nutrient already added. I oxygenated each addition of starter wort with pure O2 through a stainless air stone for about 30 seconds. I built up to about 1000 ml after a few days when I decided to hold of brewing until the following weekend. So I put the starter in the fridge for a few days. I pulled the starter back out of the fridge, decanted by just poured off the excess liquid, and added more oxygenated starter wort over the course of a few more days. I would also shake the starter every once in a while to keep everything mixed up. The starter itself smelled very strong of apples when I pitched the yeast into the wort (which was also well oxygenated). I would like to say it is what John Palmer calls "acetalyhde" in his How To Brew brook. The beer is also rather cloudy. What did I do to cause such a strong apple cidery smell and taste? None of my other beers have ever had this problem. It has been kegged for 2 weeks now and not really dissipated at all. The beer is drinkable but is overwhelmed by the apple cidery taste. Thanks for any ideas you might shoot my way. Ted Teuscher Lenexa, KS Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 08/06/05, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster@hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96