New research on dry yeast

[MHB]

QUU levels of chloramine are quite low. Ascorbic acid or K/Na metabisulphite is more more likely to impact the end product than the low ppb of chloramine. The question was meant to be whether tap water disinfectants impact or kill the yeast if rehydrating with tap water.

Yes and No, Metabisulfite in reasonable concentrations will harm yeast but it has to be at fairly high concentrations to do much harm or be tasted generally given as >10mg/L (PPM).
Chlorophenols on the other hand can be detected (tasted) at as low as 1ug/L (0.001mg/L) and are regarded as a big problem by the time you get to 5-40ug/L.
Trick is to use very little Metabisulfite to get rid of the Halogens that make something that is both way better at harming yeast and tastes like **** in very small concentrations.
Remember that Metabisulfite will also react with Oxygen so that used in mashing... is going to be denatured long before you start talking about pitching yeast, for yeast work I get ultrapure water from woolies 10L is usually $5-6, tastes good to.
Mark

 

[hoppy2B]

And what have you based that on? It's most likely true if the same amount of cells survive the pitch, but if the dry pitching kills a big enough portion of them then it could adversely affect the pitch rate, which could then adversely affect the beer. I don't think anyone is saying that this will happen 100% of the time with dry pitching - it's just a potential risk that isn't there with properly re-hydrated yeast. And it's a risk I'm personally not willing to take when I do use dry yeast. If others want to do it, that's up to them. But you're not making many allies with your arrogant complete and utter dismissal of decades of scientific research based on nothing but your own beers and/or what basically amounts to a marketing release at this point.

I'm happy to change my mind on it if the science shows it to be that way but until that happens I see no good reason to. And since you don't have a lab to do the tests properly like you accused everyone else of earlier on, what makes you an authority on anything any more than anyone else? Cut the ******** already. Nobody gives a flying **** if you dry pitch your yeast or not, but some of us like to base our practices on real science, not anecdotes.

To what science are you referring? I've not seen you make one single reference to any scientific article or the like regarding pitch rate and its implications. The only thing I've seen you quote is hearsay.

 

[MHB]

Just googled "the effect on pitching rates beer" this is the first one to turn up.
Interesting that they start at a pitch rate of 1x10^7 cells/mL they aren't silly enough to start any lower!
Feel free to do some basic research for your self, instead of coming up with BS repeating it loudly and often. If you do some work for yourself you wont be saying we are just making it all up.
Mark

 

[gunbrew]

This guy recommends to sprinkle with an elbow bounce.

 

[Rocker1986]

To what science are you referring? I've not seen you make one single reference to any scientific article or the like regarding pitch rate and its implications. The only thing I've seen you quote is hearsay.

Neither have you. The only thing you've referenced is a marketing release and anecdotal crap. But since you've asked...

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/j.2050-0416.2011.tb00482.x

It's about 7 or 8 years old now, and things may have changed since, but we don't know that until something further is released.

The topic is about the need to re-hydrate dry yeast in water before pitching or not, not the implications of pitching rates as such. I only mentioned that because the science has suggested for a while now that properly re-hydrated yeast retains more live and healthy cells upon pitching than it does when it's simply chucked into wort dry. Since you are clearly too lazy to use Google or bother doing any research of your own and would rather just shitcan everyone who disagrees with your opinion, here's another page
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/j.2050-0416.2007.tb00259.x

These sorts of articles are exactly the reasons I do what I do in my brewing. Off topic but similar articles about the effects of hot break, fermentation temperature etc. are the reasons why I try to prevent hot break getting in the fermenter as much as possible, and use suitable ferment temps to get the best beer I can. Coupled with using pitching rates in the vicinity of recommended rates (obviously you can't get lab precision at home), my beers are better than they've ever been. I don't really care if Joe Bloggs throws all the break in, dry pitches yeast, ferments at 28 degrees and reckons he gets great beer. It's ****** brewing practice and it means nothing except maybe his tastebuds are ******. The processes recommended by brewing science are generally accepted by everyone to be the best processes until something comes along that proves them wrong, like any other science. The proof is in the beer glass, with consistently great tasting beer every batch using these methods.

Do whatever you want, but don't accuse people of making **** up just because you think it doesn't ****** matter or whatever. I know most people are usually too lazy to bother citing references to the claims they make so I tend to go and research it myself to see if they're talking **** or not. It may help you to do the same thing before shitposting about it.

 

[jackgym]

Here's hoping all the bruised egos have recovered, and we can continue pitching our yeast as we so desire, not how some people think we should.

 

[MHB]

Here's hoping all the bruised egos have recovered, and we can continue pitching our yeast as we so desire, not how some people think we should.

I think that's a very interesting attitude. Naturally you can do whatever you like with your yeast and beer.
To me the whole point of this sort of conversation is about getting the best results from your ingredients (or money if you prefer).
If we can learn that using a product like dry yeast will give better results if you use one method or another I think we all benefit.
In this case there is strong evidence that the right amount of healthy yeast will make the beet taste better, the idea that using a tiny amount of old/unhealthy yeast will give the same result as using more fresh/healthy yeast is pretty counterintuitive and I believe demonstrably wrong, certainly it isn't supported by any sort of research nor by experience (neither mine and that of thousands of other brewers).
To my mind its good to see research continuing on the best way to use yeast, when I spend money on an ingredient I want it to deliver!
The new evidence shows that whether you pitch dry or rehydrate isn't all that important, but that doing either at the right temperature is very important - I now have better information on which to base my decisions on how I will use the yeast I have brought.
Mark

 

[jackgym]

I think that's a very interesting attitude. Naturally you can do whatever you like with your yeast and beer.
To me the whole point of this sort of conversation is about getting the best results from your ingredients (or money if you prefer).
If we can learn that using a product like dry yeast will give better results if you use one method or another I think we all benefit.
In this case there is strong evidence that the right amount of healthy yeast will make the beet taste better, the idea that using a tiny amount of old/unhealthy yeast will give the same result as using more fresh/healthy yeast is pretty counterintuitive and I believe demonstrably wrong, certainly it isn't supported by any sort of research nor by experience (neither mine and that of thousands of other brewers).
To my mind its good to see research continuing on the best way to use yeast, when I spend money on an ingredient I want it to deliver!
The new evidence shows that whether you pitch dry or rehydrate isn't all that important, but that doing either at the right temperature is very important - I now have better information on which to base my decisions on how I will use the yeast I have brought.
Mark

Totally agree. The whole thing blew up because some brewers prefer to re-hydrate their yeast and some prefer to sprinkle the packet onto the wort. It turned into an argument regarding who was right. It works just as well either way, apparently.

 

[EmptyB]

Actually it turned into one forum user bordering on being a troll and others taking him down with sweet, unbiased science.

 

[Rocker1986]

What it turned into was one person arrogantly telling all the pro re-hydration camp that we're all full of **** and "I was right all along yay me!", and basing that statement on essentially nothing but "well I don't do it and it works fine" and an early publication of a study that appears to show that it doesn't matter as much as we thought it did. I don't have a problem if the new science shows that, I'll just change my views in line with it. Until now, pretty well everything suggested re-hydrating in water first was better for the yeast, including Lallemand's package instructions for pitching.

I don't really care what anyone else does, it's when they shitpost about something like that and essentially say the science was wrong for years and they knew better and blah blah blah, they just end up making themselves look like a F-wit. You can offer advice but it's up to them if they take it on board or not. Personally, I want the best results I can get so I'm happy to put a little more time and effort in to try to adhere as best I can to the recommended best practices in all aspects of my brewing. Whether others want to do that is entirely up to them, but just because they choose not to doesn't mean the other information is wrong, or that doing those things is a waste of time. They'll just never know if their beers could be better or not.

 

[MHB]

Actually it turned into one forum user bordering on being a troll and others taking him down with sweet, unbiased science.

Personally I think one forum user crossed the border. M

 

[jackgym]

Dear oh dear. Let's shut this thread down, shall we?

 

[Brewno Marz]

Yes and No, Metabisulfite in reasonable concentrations will harm yeast but it has to be at fairly high concentrations to do much harm or be tasted generally given as >10mg/L (PPM).
Chlorophenols on the other hand can be detected (tasted) at as low as 1ug/L (0.001mg/L) and are regarded as a big problem by the time you get to 5-40ug/L.
Trick is to use very little Metabisulfite to get rid of the Halogens that make something that is both way better at harming yeast and tastes like **** in very small concentrations.
Remember that Metabisulfite will also react with Oxygen so that used in mashing... is going to be denatured long before you start talking about pitching yeast, for yeast work I get ultrapure water from woolies 10L is usually $5-6, tastes good to.
Mark

OK, thanks. I think you misunderstood my question. The question was whether tap water disinfectants (chlorine or chloramine) will kill or harm yeast, as this would influence how I rehydrate.

 

[Jack of all biers]

OK, thanks. I think you misunderstood my question. The question was whether tap water disinfectants (chlorine or chloramine) will kill or harm yeast, as this would influence how I rehydrate.

Short answer is yes they can and there is some anecdotal evidence around, but as far as actual research on brewers yeast, there isn't any to be found. The research that is out there is mostly aimed at fungi that are toxic to us. This is one, where some fungi needed long (1-5 hours) exposure to very high rates (10-50 ppm) to kill them, may not be indicative, as it seems it is very fungi dependant. So would 0.3ppm (I'm guessing your water wouldn't have much higher levels of residual chloramines left in it by the time it comes out your tap) kill brewers yeast. Well, unlikely for the 30 mins you may rehydrate it in, but that is just my guess.

I think the main concern would be not treating your water that you use to make your wort with (I'm not just talking about the 100mls used to rehydrate the yeast here). With chloramines and chlorine in your mains water are you using it to make your wort also? If so you will be more likely to affect the flavour of your beer and I would be treating that water as I previously posted. And as I previously posted at the same time you treat it, add 100-200 ml to be used for your yeast rehydration. Ascorbic acid in the dose it is used to bind the chlorine won't affect the yeast and splashing and boiling the water will negate the metabisulphite. Carbon filter is better if you aren't sure on adding things to your water. If you use different water for making your wort, then I'd only ask, why not use 100 ml of that to rehydrate your yeast?

 

[goatchop41]

QUU levels of chloramine are quite low. Ascorbic acid or K/Na metabisulphite is more more likely to impact the end product than the low ppb of chloramine. The question was meant to be whether tap water disinfectants impact or kill the yeast if rehydrating with tap water.

Bollocks it will. The correct dosage of ascorbic acid (dosage = ppm of chloramine in the water x 2.5g per 1000L of water) will not make any negative difference to your yeast or the beer. The chloramine certainly will, in the off flavour producing reaction that it has with the yeast

 

[Rocker1986]

Does distilling water remove chloramine? I've been treating my distilled water with K met when I brew with it just in case, although I never noticed any issues with not treating it or tap water. I figure it's better to be on the safe side than risk off flavours though.

 

[Jack of all biers]

Does distilling water remove chloramine? I've been treating my distilled water with K met when I brew with it just in case, although I never noticed any issues with not treating it or tap water. I figure it's better to be on the safe side than risk off flavours though.

If the distilling is done correctly then any chloramine should be left behind along with ions like Cl, SO4, Na etc. The whole purpose of distilling is to purify the water as much as possible. If done with too much gusto, then maybe (I stress maybe) some might go with the water vapour, but you'd be taking most other ions with the water too if chloramine went with it. I really think it is unlikely if your still is set up and used correctly. You seem a switched on brewer, so I'd suggest you are worried over nothing.

metabisulfite (S2O5-2) + monochloramine (2NH2Cl) + 3H20 --> 2NH4+ + 2Cl- + 2SO4-2 + 2H+ By distilling you should be leaving most of the resultant ions behind.

If you are really worried about it, may I suggest a slight change to your practice and add the potassium metabisulphite prior to distilling the water. Otherwise you are just adding potassium (no issue) and ultimately sulphates to your water, which may throw out your Cl:SO4 ratios when you add your later salt additions. Probably not a real issue for you, but if you are distilling the water to get it as pure as you can, then I'd leave it that way if I were you.

 

[Brewno Marz]

Bollocks it will. The correct dosage of ascorbic acid (dosage = ppm of chloramine in the water x 2.5g per 1000L of water) will not make any negative difference to your yeast or the beer. The chloramine certainly will, in the off flavour producing reaction that it has with the yeast

So, that is quite an agressive response. I have not experienced any deleterious effect from chloramine in Brisbane water. Where is your supply from? If you PM me your suburb I can get a analysis for your bulk supply point.

 

[goatchop41]

So, that is quite an agressive response. I have not experienced any deleterious effect from chloramine in Brisbane water. Where is your supply from? If you PM me your suburb I can get a analysis for your bulk supply point.

Perhaps not to your personal threshold of detection, or perhaps you are lucky enough to have used yeasts that haven't reacted strongly with the chloromine. But I am simply being blunt about it - the chloramine is much, much more liekly to affect the final product than a tiny bit of ascorbic acid or metabisulphite.
I have information from the local brewery that our local water tops out at 3ppm of chloramine. They use filtering to remove it from their water

 

[Jack of all biers]

Can I just correct one thing here. Chlorine, where ever it comes from, doesn't need yeast to react with phenols to create chlorophenols. This process can happen as early as the mash, in the kettle or in the wort (including topping up the K&K with water which contains chlorine/chloramines). The most common cause of tasting it is not rinsing chlorine based cleaners/sanitisers from equipment, but high levels of chlorine/chloramine in the water would be detectable to a lot of people (not all).

@goatchop41 is correct, different people are more, or less able to detect the flavours produced by this reaction. I never used to treat my mains water, nor tasted any chlorophenol flavours, until an Uncle from England once had a beer and could taste what he described as chlorine. I've used Ascorbic Acid ever since. The taste can also range in descriptors depending, from Adhesive tape, Band-Aid, disinfectant, medicinal, un-cured lacquer and a few more.