Olive Oil - Testing

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
What you need to do is test a range of ethanol concentrations.

The problem with using a single concentration that kills 100% of the control cells is that it will be pretty darn toxic to the OO yeast, even if the hypothesis is correct that OO makes yeast more resistant. It is tough to see a significant difference in this experiment. The same goes for a too low concentration of ethanol.

The standard measurement for these studies is LD50, the dose of toxin that causes 50% lethality. Then compare LD50 of control versus OO yeast. Differences in that value tell you if OO has the effect of making yeast more resistant to ethanol.

I disagree, based on my explanation above. It is a much more detailed experiment to do it correctly.

I've done similar types of tests including ABV effects on yeast. You can see the results here:
http://woodlandbrew.blogspot.com/2013/01/abv-effects-on-yeast.html

Testing the effects of olive oil on attenuation is intriguing, although like others said, it has been done. If I was going to test it I would want to look at a fermentation with a high potential to stall and have a control that is not aerated and without olive oil that should stall as a comparison. It would have to be conducted in triplicate at a minimum and I would probably look at a few inoculation rates and gravities as well. These kind of tests take several hours to set up. 15-30 minuets per day to monitor progress and several hours at the end to collect the results. Then there are normally several hours of data processing and write ups. Also, if you are trying a new technique, or haven't done this type of testing before chances are that it will not produce adequate data.

Anything short of this level of testing leaves too many question marks in my mind.

But as for the test on the flavor effects as is being discussed in this thread. I think that's a great idea. I hope that there are enough people willing to contribute.
 
I’m bottling my olive oil experiment today. I was surprised to see they look different. They taste different too. The picture was taken at eleven days. OO is the one on the left.

Both batches started at 1.062 and finished at 1.017. The yeast was one day old slurry. The slurry was divided and warmed to pitching temperature. One starter got two drops of olive oil. Both fractions (200mL) got five hours (alternately) on the stirplate with 150 mL of fresh wort.

Both batches were poured through a funnel into five gallon carboys. That was the only aeration.

I’ll post tasting results when they’re available

3256.jpg
 
I’m bottling my olive oil experiment today. I was surprised to see they look different. They taste different too. The picture was taken at eleven days. OO is the one on the left.

Both batches started at 1.062 and finished at 1.017.........
I’ll post tasting results when they’re available

Nice. My first batch for this test is being bottled this weekend as well. The version with OO was 2 points lower 10 or 14 days in, but both finished the same. Will post that as I have tasting results...and at that time I'll setup a google doc or something to record results.
 
Honey-Orange Hefe - using WLP300

OG 1049
Batch w/ OO = FG 1010
Batch w/out = FG 1010

3 Taste testers, triple blind. 1 could not pick the beers that matched. Of the other 2 results, one preferred the OO, and one the batch w/out. But all comments were really that it was identical.

The batch with OO after 1 week was two points lower, but that was the only difference. Will keep putting these results, and other posted results, to an excel sheet.
 
Honey-Orange Hefe - using WLP300

OG 1049
Batch w/ OO = FG 1010
Batch w/out = FG 1010

3 Taste testers, triple blind. 1 could not pick the beers that matched. Of the other 2 results, one preferred the OO, and one the batch w/out. But all comments were really that it was identical.

The batch with OO after 1 week was two points lower, but that was the only difference. Will keep putting these results, and other posted results, to an excel sheet.

Thanks. No surprise for me.
 
I am surprised, that is very different than my preliminary informal test.

I sprung a couple of bottles on some experienced judges. They only knew that it was an experiment with one slight difference.

They all thought the difference was in the hops. Four preferred the OO sample, one liked the regular, one had no preference. All perceived a substantial difference.

I will be running a large scale double blind test soon. Stay tuned !
 
After going through this thread, I would like to add some points to ponder:
1) what kind of olive oil are you using? This is actually very important. The grades of oil have highly different flavors and robustness.
2) most olive oils sold in the US have been adulterated with grain oils, such as corn or canola. These oils have acids and oxidizers that can change the flavor of your beer. Since you don't know what oils or how much was used in your bottle of olive oil, the effect is unmeasurable because of its random nature.

My 2 pennies...
Doc
 
After going through this thread, I would like to add some points to ponder:
1) what kind of olive oil are you using? This is actually very important. The grades of oil have highly different flavors and robustness.
2) most olive oils sold in the US have been adulterated with grain oils, such as corn or canola. These oils have acids and oxidizers that can change the flavor of your beer. Since you don't know what oils or how much was used in your bottle of olive oil, the effect is unmeasurable because of its random nature.

My 2 pennies...
Doc

The effect of different grades/types of olive oils when olive oil appears to have no effect in the first place...is still no effect...:)
 
I have the results from the large scale double blind test. The audience survey split roughly in thirds. They had no idea what they were testing, or even if they were different. Sample size 75.

1. Prefer OO 37%
2. Prefer regular 32%
3. No preference/no difference 29%

Afterward I talked to individuals and asked if they had a favorite. The OO fans found it hoppier, brighter and sweeter. Regular was described as crisper drier and more balanced. The people that perceived a difference described it as substantial.

I am planning a triangle test soon.
 
I have the results from the large scale double blind test. The audience survey split roughly in thirds. They had no idea what they were testing, or even if they were different. Sample size 75.

1. Prefer OO 37%
2. Prefer regular 32%
3. No preference/no difference 29%

Afterward I talked to individuals and asked if they had a favorite. The OO fans found it hoppier, brighter and sweeter. Regular was described as crisper drier and more balanced. The people that perceived a difference described it as substantial.

I am planning a triangle test soon.

How old was the beer they tasted?
 
How 'bout this for the triangle ?
---------------------------
Triangle Test

Which one’s different?
(Circle)

A B C

D E F


Different how?
Indicate more or less If same leave blank

Hoppy

Malty

Estery

Sweetness

Crispness

Head

Body


Comments -
 
How 'bout this for the triangle ?
---------------------------
Triangle Test

Which one’s different?
(Circle)

A B C

D E F


Different how?
Indicate more or less If same leave blank

Hoppy

Malty

Estery

Sweetness

Crispness

Head

Body


Comments -

At first glance it looks good to me, but in doing these I've found it's best to think about it for a while before settling on questions. You need to make sure you're getting all the info you need and not biasing the answers.
 
Maybe ask the tastier to rank the beers in regard to each adjective you list: i.e. For hoppiness: B>C but B=A.

That could give you categorical columns to tally up in Excel?...maybe?
 
Denny, I hadn’t planned on saving any, My pales are best at 6-8 weeks. I'm shooting for 40 trials, which ought to take most of the remaining beer.

broadbill, I thought that was implied. Is this more clear? I want this to be as simple as possible, for me and everybody.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Different how?
How is the one you picked different than the other two?
Indicate more+ or less- If same, leave blank
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

No spreadsheets for me. I’d rather do the math. In this case I’ll try to find someone to do it for me. What I know about probability I learned playing poker.
 
The reason I asked is because IIRC both NB and Vance found significant deterioration in OO bbers over time. I'd have to double check to ne sure of that, though. And I think itwould reallky be worth your while to look at the spreadsheet that AJ has for triangle tasting.
 
Well that’s news to me. I thought those experiments were done with the toothpick method, which I would expect to show no difference at all.

To be clear, we’re talking about a drop or two in the starter on this thread.

AJ’s spreadsheet won’t run on my computers. I have QuattroPro because it was free with WordPerfect, but it’s not completely compatible with Excel.
 
Ah, forgot you were doing it in the starter. Man, that seems ike it might be harder to quantify. I wish you luck. If I can convert that spreadsheet for ya, I'll let you know.
 
I’m not down with the math, but I get it on a superficial level. I know AJ comes up with some non-intuitive, but probably correct stuff. I might question the assumptions for the model, but I don’t question the analysis. I value what he does for me and the great unwashed.

I plan to run my triangles on Saturday, so I should have some raw data on Sunday. I imagine somebody will whip out some probabilities. If not I will figure it out or find someone to do it.

I just bought 120 cups and the beer is chillin’. Stay tuned.
 
broadbill, I thought that was implied. Is this more clear? I want this to be as simple as possible, for me and everybody.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Different how?
How is the one you picked different than the other two?
Indicate more+ or less- If same, leave blank
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will say I'm confused about the 6 samples (A-F) instead of just three...how many different ones will be in there? Are you giving all 6 to everybody or are there two sets of tasting samples?

Also, my understanding of a triangle test is that all they could all be the same, or they could all be different. Your question set only works for one beer being different than the other two. Furthermore, you have indicated as much to the taster by the way the question is stated. This may or may not influence how they judge the beer.

Lastly, if you are going to use AJ's speadsheet you need to run the test identically to how he did his; otherwise his calculations may not work on your setup.

Sorry to throw all of these variables into the mix; I'm beginning to understand how complicated taste tests can be!
 
Broadbill my test has two sets of samples, abc and def and they are indeed odd man out. ABC is two x’s and a y, and DEF is two y’s and an x. I did it this way to keep from running out of x or y too soon.

It would be fun to have a test with identical samples, and my homebrew club is probably going to do that this year.

I’m not going to worry about AJ’s spreadsheet. It would be good to know how many votes it takes to kill the null hypothesis. I’ve never liked that critter.
 
Currently working on my own test. I have a question in regards to your test method, apologies for not just posting results.

Have you (or anyone else in the experiment) did a beer that did not use any form of aeration? To see if standard transferring actually gives enough O2 to let the yeast do their thing. As adding oxygen is far harder in high gravity beers, that is where I play to do my real proving grounds (as basic transferring will no where near get the O2 levels required).
 

" Moreover, olive oil will not dissolve in wort and must first be dissolved in 100% ethanol. For any homebrewers reading this – do not add a drop of olive oil to your beer. I had to weigh 1 gram of oil, dissolve it, and make a serial dilution until I had close to 0.1 ug/ml. Of this solution, I added 100 uls directly to the wort."

Has anyone else come across this? This is the first I've seen of this and no one else is talking about this. Where does this come from? The solubility of oil in water? This seems like an important part of testing this theory and I haven't seen it anywhere.
 
Has anyone else come across this? This is the first I've seen of this and no one else is talking about this.

I've read the whole paper and didn't notice any mention of adding alcohol to the oil. I wonder if he was relying on first hand knowledge of oil and water mixing, or if he knows specifically how the oil would be used by the yeast.

I also would like to know more.
 
I kind of lost track of this thread but I think I described how a triangle test works earlier. It should be clear that this is not an AJ inventions. It is a standard testing technique and the procedure is spelled out in detail in the ASBC MOA's.

I will say I'm confused about the 6 samples (A-F) instead of just three...how many different ones will be in there? Are you giving all 6 to everybody or are there two sets of tasting samples?

Apparently there are 2 sets of sample (6 beers total) presented. This is not a triangle test.


Also, my understanding of a triangle test is that all they could all be the same, or they could all be different. Your question set only works for one beer being different than the other two. Furthermore, you have indicated as much to the taster by the way the question is stated. This may or may not influence how they judge the beer.

In a triangle test 2 beers, A and B are compared. The beers are presented in groups of three of which there are 6 possible combinations in which two samples are the same and the third different:
AAB, ABA, ABB, BBA, BAB, and BAA.

For each panelist a die is rolled and one of those six groupings is assigned to him according to which face comes up. Thus not only which beer is the odd one is randomized but also the order in which they are presented. Looking at #64: the expected value of the amount of A and B used in filling the cups is equal. If the volumes are not nearly equal the panel size is too small or you have been very unlucky. For example, if you have n panelists the total number of ways in which groups can be assigned is 6^n. The number of ways in which groupings in which A is the odd beer can be assigned is 3^n. Thus the probability that all n panelists get groups with A odd is (1/2)^n = 0.1% for 10 panelists, .02% for 12 etc. Possible but quite unlikely.

The panelist is asked to identify the odd beer and then answer some second question (e.g. ("Which is better?"). Obviously, if he can't tell them apart his opinion as to which is better is not worth much. That's what makes triangle testing so powerful. The odds of correctly guessing which is the different beer and of choosing it as better by coin flipping by an ensemble of panelists is very low. The spreadsheet calculates those probabilities and it duplicates the numbers found in the MOA so there is nothing magic about the spreadsheet.


Lastly, if you are going to use AJ's speadsheet you need to run the test identically to how he did his; otherwise his calculations may not work on your setup.
You don't have to do things identically but you have follow all the details given in the MOA. If you present 4 beers or 6 beers or don't randomize the order of presentation or allow color differences to be perceived when A is a different color than B then it isn't a triangle test and the numbers in the ASBC Table and the numbers computed by my spreadsheet don't apply. Other schemes may have statistical power comparable to the triangle test but the triangle test numbers won't fit.

Sorry to throw all of these variables into the mix; I'm beginning to understand how complicated taste tests can be!
Yes, amen to that. You really have to think your experiment through. If you are interested in telling whether A tastes better or not than B while A is darker than B then you have to obscure the color as the panelist will be able to tell A from B by the color if he is able to see it. If, OTOH, you want to know if OO darkens beer noticeably then you would want the panelist to be able to see it.

Now supposed A and B are the same color or color is obscured but one is more highly carbonated than the other. Again, the panelist will easily be able to tell which is the odd beer with no consideration as to what you are after which is taste.
 
" Moreover, olive oil will not dissolve in wort and must first be dissolved in 100% ethanol. For any homebrewers reading this – do not add a drop of olive oil to your beer. I had to weigh 1 gram of oil, dissolve it, and make a serial dilution until I had close to 0.1 ug/ml. Of this solution, I added 100 uls directly to the wort."

Has anyone else come across this? This is the first I've seen of this and no one else is talking about this. Where does this come from? The solubility of oil in water? This seems like an important part of testing this theory and I haven't seen it anywhere.

You can think of it this way. Imagine the olive oil is corn starch and the wort is hot soup. Maybe you've encountered this during cooking: if you plop a tablespoon of corn starch in the soup, you are going to get a ball of cornstarch floating in soup. If you break it up it will still be dry in the center. That's because the corn starch repels the water enough that it can't wet the inside.

Now, if you swirl the corn starch in cold water until it is suspended before adding it to the hot soup, the starch will dissolve into the soup and work as intended.

The olive oil works the same way. Added to water it remains a 'blob' like the corn starch, with most of the oil unavailable to the solution. Even if it breaks up into tiny bubbles, these are still huge compared to the yeast and the liquid between these bubbles contains zero molecules of oil. Since the olive oil is essentially being used as a vitamin to replace a product of yeast's aerobic metabolism, this is not ideal.

However, if you dissolve the oil in ethanol, it is like suspending the corn starch, only even more so. When dissolved, all molecules are separate and enter the wort separately. They spread throughout the wort and are much more available to the yeast. Over time they might reassemble, but it would take a very, very long time and hopefully the yeasties would chomp them up before then.

I looked up some studies using my academic access. Under fairly aerobic (i.e. healthy) conditions, it looks like Sac make close to 3.5mg/kg palmitoleic acid, dry cell weight. Palmitoleic acid would be the limiting constituent in just about any plant oil you could add, so we'll take it as a basis. I haven't dehydrated and weighed my yeast after a fermentation, but if someone were to do so it would be easy to find out the right amount of oil to add:

(weight of cake)* (3.5mg/kg) / (0.3-3.5% palmitoleic acid in olive oil)

or, since the numbers work out so nicely,
1-10mg/100g of anticipated dry yeast cake per batch

Taking a conservative guess at 100g of dry yeast cake for a 5 gallon batch, I get 10mg (or 0.011mL) of olive oil per 5 gallon batch (in line with other estimates), or appx 1.1mL of a 1% v/v olive oil solution in ethanol.

I don't know if its been mentioned earlier in the thread, but extra virgin olive oil is not the best choice. You want the thinnest, yellowest, most tasteless olive oil you can find to reduce phenolic content and ester generation. Macadamia oil might be a better choice because of its lower phenolic content (~48mg/kg vs 220mg/kg for the lightest olive oil)* and higher concentration of palmitoleic acid, which yeast need the most. What flavor is there is nutty rather than fruity or bitter, which should blend into the malt profile much nicer, although it would take a prince's nose to detect any flavor in 5 gallons: you'd be adding only 0.22mL of a 1% solution of macadamia oil in ethanol to match the above calculations.

Forgive me if any of this was explored earlier in the thread as I only heard of the idea today, and haven't yet read the whole thing.

Sources:
*Influence of Oxygen Addition during Growth Phase on the Biosynthesis of Lipids in Saccharomyces cerevisiae (M330-9) in Enological Fermentations, Valero et al.

*Antioxidant properties of phenolic compounds in macadamia nuts, Quinn & Tang

*http://www.agbiolab.com/files/agbiolab_Polyphenols.pdf
 
Previously i thought about adding olive oil during the boil.
But if i would make an olive oil/ethanol solution then i should wait until the wort chills below the ethanol's boiling point?

edit: is it possible to use stuff like vodka instead of ethanol?
 
Vodka is ethanol. Well ethanol and water mixed.

Yeah but i thought that the strenght/ABV should be ~100%.

So i dilute olive oil with vodka/whiskey etc. and add a miniscule amount to the wort before pitching? (when the wort is cool)
 
Yeah but i thought that the strenght/ABV should be ~100%.

So i dilute olive oil with vodka/whiskey etc. and add a miniscule amount to the wort before pitching? (when the wort is cool)

Considering there really isn't any evidence that olive oil has an effect on the production of beer, why would you add it in the first place? Or are you also doing a comparison test?
 
Considering there really isn't any evidence that olive oil has an effect on the production of beer, why would you add it in the first place? Or are you also doing a comparison test?

Wow, you read my mind! I was about to post the same thing! My conversation with Grady Hull told me that homebrewers aren't trying to use OO the way it was intended, New Belgium didn't care for the results, and they no longer do it. Why bother?
 
I would add my own piss (in this miniscule amounts we are talking about here) to my beer if someone would say it helps oxygenating my wort.
By the way i want to add it because my wort oxygenating practices are sub par. (i just shake the carboy for a few seconds) And if olive really works it seems like it will be cheaper and safer than using oxygenating stones and pumps.
I already have vodka and olive oil, why shouldn't i try it? I will probably be able to do a comparison, i have some little 1 gal carboys since i am just in the process of upgrading from the stovetop (1 gal brews) to a 5 gal rig.
 
I would add my own piss (in this miniscule amounts we are talking about here) to my beer if someone would say it helps oxygenating my wort.
By the way i want to add it because my wort oxygenating practices are sub par. (i just shake the carboy for a few seconds) And if olive really works it seems like it will be cheaper and safer than using oxygenating stones and pumps.
I already have vodka and olive oil, why shouldn't i try it? I will probably be able to do a comparison, i have some little 1 gal carboys since i am just in the process of upgrading from the stovetop (1 gal brews) to a 5 gal rig.

But what makes you think it will work when there's no evidence? When the guy who wrote the paper says it won't? When the brewery that tried using it (albeit in another way) stopped because their beer was sub par after using it? Why not spend $15 for a MixStir and get something that will definitely work? If you want to try OO, that's up to you. It's just hard for me to understand why.
 
But what makes you think it will work when there's no evidence? When the guy who wrote the paper says it won't? When the brewery that tried using it (albeit in another way) stopped because their beer was sub par after using it? Why not spend $15 for a MixStir and get something that will definitely work? If you want to try OO, that's up to you. It's just hard for me to understand why.

People love chasing ever-elusive magic pills
 
I would add my own piss (in this miniscule amounts we are talking about here) to my beer if someone would say it helps oxygenating my wort.

Uh ok....anyone ever tell you to be careful of the stuff you read on the internets?...:drunk:

By the way i want to add it because my wort oxygenating practices are sub par. (i just shake the carboy for a few seconds) And if olive really works it seems like it will be cheaper and safer than using oxygenating stones and pumps.

Why do you think your oxygenating practices are subpar? Do you have an actual problem with the beer you make?

I already have vodka and olive oil, why shouldn't i try it? I will probably be able to do a comparison, i have some little 1 gal carboys since i am just in the process of upgrading from the stovetop (1 gal brews) to a 5 gal rig.

The point here is it has been tried and it doesn't appear to have an effect. Go back and read the threads at least, at least see what has been done. We've argued this to death, only to have more people try more experiments....where are the results of those experiments by the way? My hope is that Denny and I goaded them enough that they would at least come back to rub our noses in it if they had positive results. :) The fact they haven't tells me they found no effect, just like the previous experiments.

Sure, maybe dissolving the OO in EtOH is the key to it all, but keep in mind some random blogger came up with that idea (sure, a smart science guy, but it is still untested). Again, previous studies suggest that it is unlikely.

I'll wait to be proven wrong and will admit it cheerily if the day ever comes. I would LOVE to be able to add OO and be done with it; unfortunately it doesn't seem to work, despite how much people want it to work.
 
But what makes you think it will work when there's no evidence? When the guy who wrote the paper says it won't? When the brewery that tried using it (albeit in another way) stopped because their beer was sub par after using it? Why not spend $15 for a MixStir and get something that will definitely work? If you want to try OO, that's up to you. It's just hard for me to understand why.

This time you beat me to it!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top