I know, everyone uses DME for starters but, can a person use corn sugar for a starter? It is close to 100% fermentable and would seem to add little to no off flavors to a given beer. Also, would it be off limits for doing any kind of yeast washing?
Corn Sugar for Starter?
- Thread starter kmk1012
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
philrose
Well-Known Member
Nope. Don't do that.
The point of a starter is to propagate yeast and get them primed to consume maltose not dextrose.
The point of a starter is to propagate yeast and get them primed to consume maltose not dextrose.
Displaced MassHole
Well-Known Member
I've done it in the past, not on purpose, but I've done it.
Dextrose, maltose.....tomAto, tomato.
The yeast want sugar and they want to reproduce and probably dont care where it came from.
Just like me I want booze, be it PBR or Johnny Blue, and you can guarantee it will have the same effect.
Dextrose, maltose.....tomAto, tomato.
The yeast want sugar and they want to reproduce and probably dont care where it came from.
Just like me I want booze, be it PBR or Johnny Blue, and you can guarantee it will have the same effect.
ballzac
Well-Known Member
TomaAto, tomato? Sounds like you're saying dextrose and maltose are the same thing.
philrose is right, you want to grow a culture of yeast that can efficiently metabolise maltose. If you use a dextrose starter, it's not going to make a HUGE difference if you're just using a couple of hundred grams in a couple of litres to give you a bigger amount of yeast to pitch, but if you're making more and splitting it between several batches, it could make a substantial difference.
I think any gain that you get by a high pitching rate (i.e. from using a starter) will be largely offset by the poor quality of the next generation of yeast if you use pure dextrose for your starter.
philrose
Well-Known Member
simple sugars are too easily consumed. When your yeast are used to eating the dextrose, fresh wort you worked all afternoon on are going to be less appealing.
mojotele
Well-Known Member
According to Palmer, yeast produce certain sets of enzymes for certain types of sugars. Thus, you want your starter sugar profile to be similar to your wort's sugar profile. If it isn't, though, you should let the starter fully ferment and chill the yeast to get it to go dormant:
ballzac
Well-Known Member
Don't forget that your starter should be reasonably low gravity, so using DME is still pretty economical for, say, a 2L starter.
Brewminator
Member
Since people infuse oxygen into the wort to get the yeast growing, would it also work to put some Hydrogen Peroxide in the wort..... I've heard it said that you can dose a goldfish in jar with a little and infuses the water with Oxygen.
It is only hydrogen and Oxygen and just water with an extra Oxygen molecule.
In a strong solution it could be a sanitizer, and then it degrades to nothing harmful.... But is it bad to use on Stainless? I have seen it for $20 for a half gallon of 19%. To sanitize will it take about 6% and to grow the yeast maybe 1% or 2%....?
I haven't researched but thought someone here might have.
mojotele
Well-Known Member
I suppose you could use some hydrogen peroxide, but the question is does it add enough oxygen to the water in quantities that are not toxic to the yeast? I really have no idea.
Seems like shaking it up and stirring is easier, effective, and doesn't require any additional ingredients.
I guess the interesting question would be: in doses not toxic to yeast, is hydrogen peroxide more economical than pure oxygen?
Seems like shaking it up and stirring is easier, effective, and doesn't require any additional ingredients.
I guess the interesting question would be: in doses not toxic to yeast, is hydrogen peroxide more economical than pure oxygen?
H2O2 doesn't just shoot off oxygen; it generates free radical oxygen, which is how it kills. If there's something around for it to attack chemically, it does. In the cases where you see O2 fizz, it's because there's something that can handle converting the free radical O's to O2. Iron works, catalase works.
Shaking is free, which is hard to beat.
Shaking is free, which is hard to beat.
Imagine feeding one batch of people McDonalds and Pizza Hut for a week and another batch of people healthy, wholesome food. Then tell them all that they have to switch to healthy, wholesome food. The ones that are already used to it will go along business as usual. The ones that are used to McDonalds and Pizza Hut are going to have a hard time adapting. That's kind of how yeast work.
If "Super Size It" was accurate, it may be harder to go from healthy to fast food, but not a bad analogy
Seriously, though, as we're a lot more complex than yeast, they have less trouble switching, as they probably won't come close to death like the guy in "Super Size It." It's only a matter of time for them to turn on another enzymatic pathway. The main thing is that one shouldn't want to wait for them switching pathways, it's precious hours that leave your wort open to other, less friendly, microbes.
Seriously, though, as we're a lot more complex than yeast, they have less trouble switching, as they probably won't come close to death like the guy in "Super Size It." It's only a matter of time for them to turn on another enzymatic pathway. The main thing is that one shouldn't want to wait for them switching pathways, it's precious hours that leave your wort open to other, less friendly, microbes.
Similar threads
