Bottling Fermenter Trub

[Nick JD]

Hey folks,

Some people were asking about bottling the trub instead of chucking it down the plug hole last week and I just took a photo so I thought I'd bung it online.

I know this technique is done by many people and it's common knowledge, but I think it might be useful to those out there who are advancing their brewing but still not buying the perfect yeast for their recipe because of the astounding price of Wyeast packs. This way, you can get 6 brews from one pack of yeast and only ever go to second generation - it's actually cheaper than buying dried yeasts.

Most will know that you can pitch a cup (250ml) of slurry from one brew straight into the next. This gives you a fairly good pitching rate, and your yeast hit the ground running. This method is basically the same, but instead of pitching that cup of slurry ... you bottle it.

When the last bottle has been filled from the fermenter and there's about 500ml of beer on top of, say 1L of trub the fermenter is gently swirled. This is done until when you lean the fermenter on an angle, the bottom is clean where there's no liquid and the trub/beer is mixed throughly.

Then 5, 300ml PET bottles (I use cheap supermarket dozens) are meticulously cleaned and sanitized and the fermenter is tilted and each one filled with what looks a lot like baby diarrhea.

The yeast type and the date is written on them and they are stored. I store them in the fridge, but you could store them in a cool, dark place if fridge space is an issue.

I used them generally within 6 months by simply letting them come up to the temperature of the brew, opening and pouring off the beer (and tasting it just to be sure), then swirling the container and pouring it straight into the new brew. Fermentation usually starts quicker than with dry yeast.

Under $2 per brew for commercial-grade yeast is nice. :icon_cheers: I've made the same recipe two times in a row, the first with virgin yeast and the second with a PET full and back to back there was no difference.

 

[manticle]

I often do similar (in fact just reserved some ringwood yeast a few minutes ago) although I generally half fill my bottles (have had a lot of pressure build up when I used to fill them and once sprayed 3787 all over the kitchen ceiling).

I prefer top cropped yeast but will reserve slurry as well - mainly to have certain strains on hand. I also reserve a little bit from each WY pack which goes into a couple of test tubes.

Unlike you though I make a starter from mine just to double check the viability of the yeast (and because I like my yeast active when it hits the wort).

Smelling and tasting before use is essential.

I've never washed mine but I am considering giving it a go. I'm curious to know if the low pH in the starter might have the same effect though?

 

[Nick JD]

I've found they don't get much pressure in them, although usually the beer on top is lightly carbonated, probably from eating up residual carbs maybe? I would be discouraged to use anything that was a gusher just in case it was not yeast activity that made it gush.

Here's a couple of photos to show the yeast sitting under the beer. It ends up looking just like a bottle with the world's thickest sediment.

This is a 1762.

And here's a US05 ... massive! I'll probably only pitch half of this one.

 

[Thirsty Boy]

. . . but you could store them in a cool, dark place if fridge space is an issue.

nooo - don't do that. Its only 6 bottles, keep em in the fridge. Temperature is the enemy of yeast slurry. 4C is the temp you want, and that's handily about what your fridge will give you.

Me personally - I wouldn't be keen to use the slurry 6 months later. It will have suffered considerable cell death and vitality degradation in that period of time. I think you'd be much better off only bottling one or two and bottling more from the subsequent fermentations. Nothing wrong with going a few generations in... much better IMHO than using old yeast. No more cost and only a little more effort for a greater likelihood of getting the beer you want.

 

[bradsbrew]

I think you'd be much better off only bottling one or two and bottling more from the subsequent fermentations. Nothing wrong with going a few generations in... much better IMHO than using old yeast. No more cost and only a little more effort for a greater likelihood of getting the beer you want.

Thats the way I do it.

Sometimes I will take a PET of slurry then drop another cube on top of the rest in the fermenter. I know thats not ideal butI have not had an issue with it yet.

Cheers

 

[manticle]

I get two bottles at most. Apart from trying to leave behind as much non yeast trub as I can, I simply don't have room in the fridge for too many longnecks, plus new yeast packets plus cc brew plus previously made candi sugar plus lactose plus test tube rack and test tubes plus longnecks of slurry

 

[MitchDudarko]

I'm gonna do this I reckon, as I tried washing yeast, and due to my inexperience, I think I sent alot of yeast down the drain.

 

[levin_ae92]

I started doing this a while ago, but like Manticle only fill half way as I also had a few issues with yeast flying everywhere in front of a very unimpressed girlfriend! I also only take one or two long necks (half full) and store in the fridge, but since I havent used many different yeasts all I have on hand atm is US05 and ringwood

 

[bigfridge]

I've found they don't get much pressure in them, although usually the beer on top is lightly carbonated, probably from eating up residual carbs maybe? I would be discouraged to use anything that was a gusher just in case it was not yeast activity that made it gush.

Here's a couple of photos to show the yeast sitting under the beer. It ends up looking just like a bottle with the world's thickest sediment.

This is a 1762.

Personally I think that you are heading for some infected beer as storing yeast using this method is not recommended. But you don't have to take my word for it (even though I used to do this about 15 years ago and did get bad infections) George Fix in Analysis of Brewing Techniques states that you should only store slurry at 1 deg c for a max of 72 hours.

From your pic there does not seem to be much health yeast - this is the thin white band in the middle. The rest is dead yeast and hop debris. During extended storage, yeast can suffer 'shock excretion' where selected Amino acids leak out of the yeast cell and this is an ideal food for bacteria.

By storing the trub this way you get a situation where the yeast is dying and the bacteria present is growing on the ideal food being provided - end result is bad beer.

Far better to store it under sterile tap water from the original smack pack - much as like Tony has shown elsewhere.

HTH,
David

 

[Mickydp1979]

Do you guys have any problems with the non-yeast leftovers? My brews usually have quite a lot of hop material still in the trub, so do you leave it in or strain that out?

 

[Nick JD]

Personally I think that you are heading for some infected beer as storing yeast using this method is not recommended. But you don't have to take my word for it (even though I used to do this about 15 years ago and did get bad infections) George Fix in Analysis of Brewing Techniques states that you should only store slurry at 1 deg c for a max of 72 hours.

From your pic there does not seem to be much health yeast - this is the thin white band in the middle. The rest is dead yeast and hop debris. During extended storage, yeast can suffer 'shock excretion' where selected Amino acids leak out of the yeast cell and this is an ideal food for bacteria.

By storing the trub this way you get a situation where the yeast is dying and the bacteria present is growing on the ideal food being provided - end result is bad beer.

Far better to store it under sterile tap water from the original smack pack - much as like Tony has shown elsewhere.

HTH,
David

So it's impossible to reculture Coopers bottle yeasts and weizen yeasts and get a great beer? That's what you're saying, right? You're also saying (contrary to what many, many people do here) that reusing yeast older than 72 hours old is a bad practice? Mate, there's some very reputable brewers in the comments above who do this ... why would you say it doesn't work if you want to retain your standing here as someone who knows their stuff?

BTW - no hop debris in there. I've never had an infection using yeast this way. Please provide references to your quotes - especially the part about bacteria being able to live in the environment you say they are thriving in. I call a big BULLSHIT on that one.

Retailers = reusing is bad. Gee, I wonder why?

 

[manticle]

Personally I think that you are heading for some infected beer as storing yeast using this method is not recommended. But you don't have to take my word for it (even though I used to do this about 15 years ago and did get bad infections) George Fix in Analysis of Brewing Techniques states that you should only store slurry at 1 deg c for a max of 72 hours.

From your pic there does not seem to be much health yeast - this is the thin white band in the middle. The rest is dead yeast and hop debris. During extended storage, yeast can suffer 'shock excretion' where selected Amino acids leak out of the yeast cell and this is an ideal food for bacteria.

By storing the trub this way you get a situation where the yeast is dying and the bacteria present is growing on the ideal food being provided - end result is bad beer.

Far better to store it under sterile tap water from the original smack pack - much as like Tony has shown elsewhere.

HTH,
David

Do you mean slurry on its own? I store mine with boiled, cooled water (and make starters so infections should reveal themselves). Seems to be OK so far although I also have sterile water + virgin yeast in test tubes which I'm slowly developing each time I buy a new yeast.

@Nick: How much extra money per financial year do you think he stands to make from convincing you not to do this?

 

[Wolfy]

I'm gonna do this I reckon, as I tried washing yeast, and due to my inexperience, I think I sent alot of yeast down the drain.

While there are many ways to achieve the same end result, my personal preference (and it seems a few other people's also) is to save a smaller sample of clean washed yeast with the expectation that there will be enough viable cells after a period of time to make a starter rather than pitch directly.

So it's impossible to reculture Coopers bottle yeasts and weizen yeasts and get a great beer? That's what you're saying, right? You're also saying (contrary to what many, many people do here) that reusing yeast older than 72 hours old is a bad practice?

The way I read it he's simply suggesting that alternate methods are generally more accepted, such as washing yeast, storing it clean and under water and then building a starter before pitching.
Obviously, nobody pitches the yeast directly from a coopers bottle.
And the standard, conventional and sometimes published wisdom is that approaching saved yeast slurry with the same expectations is logical and sensible:
1) You save enough viable yeast either from slurry, a slant, a vial stored from a smack pack or any similar method,
2) After storing it for a period of time (which to me is the half the point of saving yeast) you make a starter to build up the number of viable cells and increase the health of the yeast before pitching.

There are many ways to reuse yeast and I don't doubt that this method works for you, it is certainly easier and more convenient than washing slurry or saving from a smack pack and then building a starter - and I'm sure that convenience is attractive to many people.

 

[Nick JD]

@Nick: How much extra money per financial year do you think he stands to make from convincing you not to do this?

Me? $0.00c

Convincing brewers of Newcastle that trub older than 72 hours is useless and will result in bad brews - maybe enough to buy his pink Hyundai new Playboy bunny seat covers .

 

[manticle]

You haven't been talking to Darren have you?

 

[Nick JD]

...and I'm sure that convenience is attractive to many people.

Cheers, Wolfy - that's why I put this thread in this subforum, in an attempt to show that those who do not buy Wyeast because it's $11, can - and improve their beers in both quality and variety.

If someone starts using great yeasts that they thought too expensive because of this thread then I suppose it's worth the hassle of people saying it doesn't work and it's not best practice. None of my brewing methods are best practice ... yet my beer is delicious. Go figure.

 

[Thirsty Boy]

People want to use liquid yeast generally, because they think it will result in better beer. That's the whole point.

Bigfridge points out - rightly in my opinion - that storing the yeast the way you suggest will very possibly result in worse beer rather than better beer. Nothing wrong with storing slurry in the shorter term under a bit of beer - but in the longer term, with all the trub in there, not so much. You are asking for an increased chance of infection and certainly for a batch of unhealthy yeast.

People can start using great yeast for less expense, there are about 20 other threads devoted to telling them how, including several on how to do exactly what you have suggested (not that you'd bother acknowledging it) - and if people take Bigfridge's advice and do it by storing under sterile water (and how is advising people to do that trying to sell them more yeast??) and then growing a starter, they avoid the potential issues of your method. So they get less expense and a greater chance of better beer.

I don't see why Bigfridge should, and I am certainly not going to provide you with quotes and references - your the one that's so quickly gone from never having brewed an AG beer to knowing more about it than people who have been brewing and studying brewing science for years... I'm sure your super powers will enable you to find and repudiate all those brewing scientists in no time flat.

As you say - none of your brewing methods is best practise... so if your beers are in fact delicious - then its in spite of that rather than because of it. I think that any but the newest and most naive of brewers will be able to see, that while bigfridge might perhaps have some yeast to sell - what you have to sell is in fact mostly bullshit.

 

[boobiedazzler]

<B>your the one that's so quickly gone from never having brewed an AG beer to knowing more about it than people who have been brewing and studying brewing science for years... I'm sure your super powers will enable you to find and repudiate all those brewing scientists in no time flat.</B>

Exactly, Nick. Regardless of how often you brewed prior to AG, and no matter how closely you have read and understood the few fundamental principals of grain preparation, mash day, hop usage, yeast processes, temperature control and sanitisation, you can never hope to excel by comparison to the old hats. You have to earn your stripes first, son. You may also think that your beer is lovely, but that's an illusion as well. One can never be a true judge of a beer's profile until they have had many, many AG beers worth of experience under their belt.

AG a dark art ? Without a doubt. Regular practice can instantly turn a brickies labouror into a SCIENTIST in a few short years AND biologically alter one's sense of taste. Unless you behold super powers like Thirsty said and somehow, unreasonable as it is, READ A LOT about the subject of brewing. I doubt your super-powers, Nick. Nobody, NOBODY (repeated for effect) with so few all-grain notches in their belt could hope to be considered a contender. Not yet, but one day, so long as you keep that cauldron aflame with happy juice.

I'm presently about to chug down one my horse-piss New-AG'er Ales and continue to read your posts, for as long as I can stand it. The beer and your posts. If only so I can get back on and tell you how much of your practices can be broken down into a hundred subpoints of incorrect brewing behaviour.

Now, where did I put John J.'s book ?

 

[Wolfy]

Cheers, Wolfy - that's why I put this thread in this subforum, in an attempt to show that those who do not buy Wyeast because it's $11, can - and improve their beers in both quality and variety.

I think the are closer to $15 or more around here, so maybe you're lucky.
There are many ways to obtain, propagate, store and save yeast, and I hope that - if nothing else - forum topics and discussion like this, give others the chance to consider exploring, saving and experimenting with various yeasts - even if they do not use the exact method outlined above.
One thing I find almost painful on the popular UK forums is their almost zealot-like passion for using dried yeast almost exclusively, so if topics like this can help people brew better beer and experiment with various yeasts and ways to save and store them ... great!
However, like most things on the magical-inter-web there are 1000 experts, 1000 different ways to do things and everyone thinks they are right, so it's a matter reading, understanding the concepts and then trying and experimenting to work out what is best for your situation and for your purposes.

 

[manticle]

I'm right.