Dehydrating Yeast

[Nick JD]

I was wondering today what the reasons are for most yeast strains not being available in a dry form, and some are?

Does anyone know what the specific reasons are that make a yeast dehydratable? 1056 and US05 as an example of one that can. Or 34/70.

Why can't we get 3068, or 1214 dry? Do some strains die when dried?

 

[felten]

I remember reading or hearing somewhere that it was because of a loss of the characteristics that make the particular strain unique.

Also for a company like whitelabs (and probably wyeast), the upfront costs for a drying plant aren't financially feasible.

 

[Nick JD]

I remember reading or hearing somewhere that it was because of a loss of the characteristics that make the particular strain unique.

Also for a company like whitelabs (and probably wyeast), the upfront costs for a drying plant aren't financially feasible.

I wonder why they'd behave differently (create a different beer) because they were dried? Is it that the "weaker" cells are the ones that are making all the esters etc?

 

[pcmfisher]

So they can keep selling you liquid yeast of course.

 

[ashley_leask]

I've seen some information on this as well, very few strains survive the drying / rehydrating process will enough viability and consistency to the original form. Given that American, European, and English ale yeasts and several lager yeasts are able to be viably dried I'm sure it could be done with more research.

 

[np1962]

If you look at the dry yeasts available aren't they fairly 'characterless' strains?
US05, S-04, S-23 all pretty clean, Windsor and Nottingham vary mostly in their attenuation. T-58 you need to push the temps to get any pepper and spice out of it.
34/70 and WB-06 are they really all that different?
When you look at it there is a reasonable range of dried yeasts, you just get more of the subtle, and not so subtle, esters and differences if you're using liquid yeast.
From what I understand the dehydrating process strips much of the character that we are used to from the liquid yeasts.
All IMO.
Cheers
Nige

 

[Nick JD]

If you look at the dry yeasts available aren't they fairly 'characterless' strains?
US05, S-04, S-23 all pretty clean, Windsor and Nottingham vary mostly in their attenuation. T-58 you need to push the temps to get any pepper and spice out of it.
34/70 and WB-06 are they really all that different?
When you look at it there is a reasonable range of dried yeasts, you just get more of the subtle, and not so subtle, esters and differences if you're using liquid yeast.
From what I understand the dehydrating process strips much of the character that we are used to from the liquid yeasts.
All IMO.
Cheers
Nige

Yeah - but why? What makes "big flavour" yeasts not dehydratable?

And I dunno, S23, S04 and WB06 are not exactly "clean". The first two are ester monsters and the third is clove city.

 

[bum]

Perhaps it isn't about not being able to do it but it not being profitable. To turn fresh yeast into dehydrated yeast would be comparatively expensive. In order to make the price comparable (refrigerating fresh yeast would certainly help here) they'd need to process very large quantities - slower moving (sales) yeasts would not be worth producing.

 

[Nick JD]

Perhaps it isn't about not being able to do it but it not being profitable. To turn fresh yeast into dehydrated yeast would be comparatively expensive. In order to make the price comparable (refrigerating fresh yeast would certainly help here) they'd need to process very large quantities - slower moving (sales) yeasts would not be worth producing.

Even with the long shelf life of dried yeasts?

I wonder how many smackpacks Wyeast and Whitelabs sell a year, compared to Fermentis?

 

[bum]

Long shelf life might conceivably compound the problem (a problem that I may have imagined). Vast quantities of numerous different yeasts probably become expensive to store. I don't imagine yeast is something you can just bung in a bunch of silos somewhere.

 

[the_new_darren]

I heard all the saf range were exactly the same strain of yeast "adapted" to different growth conditions (temp).

It could have neen bullshit though as the source wasn't referenced.

d

 

[Ross]

If you look at the dry yeasts available aren't they fairly 'characterless' strains?
US05, S-04, S-23 all pretty clean, Windsor and Nottingham vary mostly in their attenuation. T-58 you need to push the temps to get any pepper and spice out of it.
34/70 and WB-06 are they really all that different?
When you look at it there is a reasonable range of dried yeasts, you just get more of the subtle, and not so subtle, esters and differences if you're using liquid yeast.
From what I understand the dehydrating process strips much of the character that we are used to from the liquid yeasts.
All IMO.
Cheers
Nige

Hi Nige, I can only guess from your comments above that your experience of dried yeasts is maybe a little limited.
I'm not sure where you got the idea that the dehydrating process strips character from the yeast, the dried yeasts avialable have plenty of character relevant to the strain.
Windsor is nothing like Nottingham, being very fruity whereas Notts tends to be dry & little dusty. T-58 gives plenty of pepper & spice even at 19c, but like most belgian yeasts with temp this can be increased.
34/70 is a good clean lager yeast whereas WB-06 is a very clovey wheat yeast similar in character to WY3333

Cheers Ross

 

[Ross]

I heard all the saf range were exactly the same strain of yeast "adapted" to different growth conditions (temp).

It could have neen bullshit though as the source wasn't referenced.

d

There's your answer
They are not from the same strain.

cheers Ross