Conan x WLP644 hybrid

SSBrew - 728
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.
For those looking for more esters, there's a thread somewhere over Conan and esters. IIRC, underpitched was the way to go to provoke more peach esters
 
So I was just looking back at past batches I've used F1 and was looking at my attenuation. I've used F1 three times now. My attenuation went like so...

1st = 92%
2nd = 90%
3rd = 88%

Anyone else sensing a trend here?? It's got me a little worried. I think I know what I should do, but was hoping for advice as well. I'm relatively certain I know why this is the case. I overbuild all my starters to harvest off 500 ml of clean starter/yeast. I then crash that out and decant, and save the yeasties in 50 ml tubes in the fridge. Ergo, when I am ready to brew with this yeast, I take a 50 ml tube out and build another starter and proceed as usual saving 500 ml. What I am getting at here is, each time I use the yeast it's a generation older.

In hindsight, I should have been splitting the slurry between, I dunno, three 50 ml tubes so I would have three tubes of X generation. Does that make sense?

Point being, hopefully I can slow this downward trend in attenuation by keeping more samples of given generations. But is there anything else I can or should be doing? I don't want to end up with like 50% attenuation the 25th time I brew with this!
 
TravelingLight said:
So I was just looking back at past batches I've used F1 and was looking at my attenuation. I've used F1 three times now. My attenuation went like so...

1st = 92%
2nd = 90%
3rd = 88%

Anyone else sensing a trend here?? It's got me a little worried. I think I know what I should do, but was hoping for advice as well. I'm relatively certain I know why this is the case. I overbuild all my starters to harvest off 500 ml of clean starter/yeast. I then crash that out and decant, and save the yeasties in 50 ml tubes in the fridge. Ergo, when I am ready to brew with this yeast, I take a 50 ml tube out and build another starter and proceed as usual saving 500 ml. What I am getting at here is, each time I use the yeast it's a generation older.

In hindsight, I should have been splitting the slurry between, I dunno, three 50 ml tubes so I would have three tubes of X generation. Does that make sense?

Point being, hopefully I can slow this downward trend in attenuation by keeping more samples of given generations. But is there anything else I can or should be doing? I don't want to end up with like 50% attenuation the 25th time I brew with this!
Click to expand...

That's the same method I use other than saving some of the slurry itself sometimes. I always thought the idea was that the yeast saved from the starter isn't considered a new generation, only the yeast saved from slurry since the slurry is the yeast that fermented a whole batch. Was it the same recipe, maybe your mash temps changed as well?
 
My F1 experience has been a little all over the place. I usually do a 3L starter, use 2L to pitch, and harvest 2 - 500ml jars for the next time.

Then I use one of the 500ml jars the next time to just do a 2L starter, and then the next time I brew I use the other 500ml jar to do a 3L starter again.

Currently on Gen 4 with both F1 and F1C4. F1 has been as follows:

1st - 76.5%
2nd - 89.9%
3rd - 84.2%
4th - 74%

Although to be fair that last one was a fermenter sour, so it wasn't exactly the most hospitable environment for my little yeast friends.

I also had mixed experience when using Conan (The Yeast Bay Vermont Ale):

1st - 75.4%
2nd - 76.7%
3rd - 80.6%
4th - 80.2%

F1C4 to-date has been as follows:

1st - 78%
2nd - 77.8%
3rd - 83.3%

I'm brewing with F1 again this weekend, so I'll definitely report back here with the results when the ferment has finished up.
 
plazola86 said:
That's the same method I use other than saving some of the slurry itself sometimes. I always thought the idea was that the yeast saved from the starter isn't considered a new generation, only the yeast saved from slurry since the slurry is the yeast that fermented a whole batch. Was it the same recipe, maybe your mash temps changed as well?
Click to expand...
Those are some good points. I hadn't thought of it that way. What you said makes sense (about harvesting from a starter not being a new gen).

Uses 2 and 3 were the exact same grist and mash temps. Although, I was using different mash tuns for those two and had different temp drops. So that could be it. Use 1 was a different grist.

Regardless, your comments about harvesting from starters not being subsequent generations definitely alleviated some of my worry. I got worried I was going to have to alter my entire process that's been working so well for a while now. Thanks.
 
I do consider yeasts harvested from starters as being a new generation. I'm not a professional yeast wrangler or anything, but one of the reasons you make a starter is so the yeasts replicate and grow cells to your desired pitching cell count.

Since they've replicated I consider that to be a new generation.

My terms may be wrong, but that's my line of thinking.
 
Yeast growth is still yeast growth. Mutations occur from mistakes in replicating DNA. Only if there is some inherent benefit to that mutation will that strain out populate the "original" strain.

From a selective perspective, I would expect continued propagation of the same strain of yeast in starter wort to eventually (this is the key, how many growth cycles is likely strain dependent) adapt it to lower sugar conditions. I don't know if this would be manifested in lower attenuation in an actual beer though? Maybe just more stress?

Anyways, I typically make 10 stocks from a first propagation (stored in the freezer with 20% glycerol), use all of those up and then make another 10 on the last one. The BEST way (and what I would imagine the commercial labs do), is to keep 2 mother stocks (one as a back up) that are only used to streak out the yeast for growth. This way, you always have a generation zero banked because you aren't "using up" the original stock.
 
drgonzo2k2 said:
I do consider yeasts harvested from starters as being a new generation. I'm not a professional yeast wrangler or anything, but one of the reasons you make a starter is so the yeasts replicate and grow cells to your desired pitching cell count.

Since they've replicated I consider that to be a new generation.

My terms may be wrong, but that's my line of thinking.
Click to expand...
Ahh that makes sense as well. I agree with you.

isomerization said:
Yeast growth is still yeast growth. Mutations occur from mistakes in replicating DNA. Only if there is some inherent benefit to that mutation will that strain out populate the "original" strain.

From a selective perspective, I would expect continued propagation of the same strain of yeast in starter wort to eventually (this is the key, how many growth cycles is likely strain dependent) adapt it to lower sugar conditions. I don't know if this would be manifested in lower attenuation in an actual beer though? Maybe just more stress?

Anyways, I typically make 10 stocks from a first propagation (stored in the freezer with 20% glycerol), use all of those up and then make another 10 on the last one. The BEST way (and what I would imagine the commercial labs do), is to keep 2 mother stocks (one as a back up) that are only used to streak out the yeast for growth. This way, you always have a generation zero banked because you aren't "using up" the original stock.
Click to expand...
Excellent idea on making 10 stocks from the initial yeast. I need to start doing that. Well, actually, I need to start freezing mine. Just haven't gone down that rabbit hole yet of figuring out how to do it. I've glanced through some articles on it. Just haven't gotten down to brass tacks yet. I think the one thing I worried about is the whole thing I've read about freezers defrosting cycle. I think some people keep the frozen yeasts in a small styrofoam box or something with an ice pack in the fridge? Is that necessary?
 
You can use an insulated lunch box with freezer packs in it to help circumvent the defrost cycle issues of abnormal freezer.

I typically save 1.6 ml vials that have 0.6 ml of 50% glycerol and 1 ml of saturated culture (taken after a 2 day growth). I haven't had any issues using one of these to grow 500-1000 ml starters to sufficient size. About the only time I use a bigger volume is if my OG is > 1.100
 
gwapogorilla said:
For those interested....
Yeast Bay sells a blend of these 2 yeasts called "Funkytown".
Click to expand...

Are you claiming insider tehcnical knowledge, or just randomly theorizing? Because TYB specifically says that their funktown blend is Conan strain plus a wild sach strain, which is generally believed to be WLP644. That's two cultured strains, in one package.

This thread, however, is about GENETIC HYBRIDs of the two. From the first page:
suregork said:
This is actually a genetic hybrid, not a yeast blend. I created the hybrid by rare mating a uracil auxotroph of Conan with a lysine auxotroph of WLP644. Hybrids were isolated by their ability to grow on media lacking uracil and lysine (which the parent auxotrophs can't grow on), and their hybrid status was further confirmed with interdelta-PCR.
...1
The strains that I'm offer to send is H1 (the original hybrid) and H1/C4 (the fastest fermenting meiotic segregant of H1, which also finished with quite a high pH) :)
Click to expand...
 
I've been staring at this stuff in my fridge for about 6 months now. I think the time has come to use it. I scored some nelson and citra from farmhouse this week for a NEIPA.
 
So, it seems some are experiencing a Browning of thier neipas with Conan, especially when bottle conditioning. My guess is some continued biotransformation from the dry hop. Anyone have any confirmation/denial that this happens with the hybrids here? Just curious.
 
Interesting if the yeast could be the culprit. I would associate the browning to oxidation, never thought about the yeast being the one doing that.
 
Have you had any turn out that way? Sorry I don't buy Into others people's problems unless it happens to me. Example: some people love keg hopping. I can't stand it it.
 
I don't bottle much anymore aside from brews to cellar. So, no, I haven't, but there's multiple accounts of it happening.
 
Jwin said:
I don't bottle much anymore aside from brews to cellar. So, no, I haven't, but there's multiple accounts of it happening.
Click to expand...


Just got done brewing a NE IPA that I'm going to ferment with 3rd generation Conan. I don't bottle but I'll post if anything weird happens.
 
suregork said:
This is actually a genetic hybrid, not a yeast blend. I created the hybrid by rare mating a uracil auxotroph of Conan with a lysine auxotroph of WLP644. Hybrids were isolated by their ability to grow on media lacking uracil and lysine (which the parent auxotrophs can't grow on), and their hybrid status was further confirmed with interdelta-PCR.

International shipping is not a problem! Since I'm shipping only small volumes (2 ml of slurry in a microtube), worldwide shipping is 2.80€. I don't have the possibility to offer larger volumes of slurry since a) there has been a lot of interest, and b) shipping gets really expensive.

The strains that I'm offer to send is H1 (the original hybrid) and H1/C4 (the fastest fermenting meiotic segregant of H1, which also finished with quite a high pH) :)
Click to expand...

Do you detail your process somewhere, and where you got your stuff? I'd love to make my own yeast crosses. :)

Edit: to clarify, I saw the blog entry, but I'm not sure how exactly you create auxotrophs?
 
Apimyces said:
Do you detail your process somewhere, and where you got your stuff? I'd love to make my own yeast crosses. :)

Edit: to clarify, I saw the blog entry, but I'm not sure how exactly you create auxotrophs?
Click to expand...

I used the same process for creating these Conan x WLP644 hybrids, as when I made these lager yeast hybrids:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10295-015-1597-6

The auxotrophs were not created, but rather selected from a population of the parent strains. Spontaneous auxotrophic mutants (both lys- and ura-) exist at a frequency of about 1 - 10 * 10^-7 cells, and these can be isolated by spreading out a suspension of the parent strains on media containing α-aminoadipic (for lys- isolates) and 5-fluoroorotic acid (for ura- isolates).
 
suregork said:
I used the same process for creating these Conan x WLP644 hybrids, as when I made these lager yeast hybrids:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10295-015-1597-6

The auxotrophs were not created, but rather selected from a population of the parent strains. Spontaneous auxotrophic mutants (both lys- and ura-) exist at a frequency of about 1 - 10 * 10^-7 cells, and these can be isolated by spreading out a suspension of the parent strains on media containing α-aminoadipic (for lys- isolates) and 5-fluoroorotic acid (for ura- isolates).
Click to expand...

Thanks, I'll look into that.

Next question would be why? You said you preferred rare mating to spore mating, but I didn't quite understand why? Did you specifically wish for polyploid hybrids instead of diploid crosses, for some reason? I know for plants polyploids are often more vigorous than diploids, was this the point? Or did you simply want the hybrid to have all of both traits, instead of just a random mix of half and half? Greater odds of heterosis effect?

Also, are those substances that laymen could get their hands on? Or should I stick with spore mating? :p
 
Apimyces said:
Thanks, I'll look into that.

Next question would be why? You said you preferred rare mating to spore mating, but I didn't quite understand why? Did you specifically wish for polyploid hybrids instead of diploid crosses, for some reason? I know for plants polyploids are often more vigorous than diploids, was this the point? Or did you simply want the hybrid to have all of both traits, instead of just a random mix of half and half? Greater odds of heterosis effect?

Also, are those substances that laymen could get their hands on? Or should I stick with spore mating? :p
Click to expand...

Several reasons, but first of all I wasn't able to get my Conan isolate to sporulate (WLP644 sporulates quite readily and has good spore viability), which means spore-to-spore mating wasn't an option. Second, if the parent strains are very heterozygous, you risk losing traits when generating spores. With rare mating you overcome both problems. I think the chemicals are probably quite difficult to get ahold of unless you work in a lab :)
 
Jwin said:
Here's the thread
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=597557
On the last page, one Brewer notes 1318 not being an issue, but Conan is.
It's happening VERY fast, but seems to be only to warm beer(bottle conditioned). There's pics as well.
Rather interesting.
Click to expand...

That would be a result of improper temperature storage and oxidation. I had that happen on every batch when brewing NEIPA until i started kegging. Hope it helps.
 
Is the original page with the info of the yeasts down now? My (work) browser just blocked it saying license expired, despite the fact that work has never blocked this site before. Any thoughts? I wanted to re-read some stuff on there.
 
TravelingLight said:
Is the original page with the info of the yeasts down now? My (work) browser just blocked it saying license expired, despite the fact that work has never blocked this site before. Any thoughts? I wanted to re-read some stuff on there.
Click to expand...


Worked for me too, maybe your work is trying to tell you something lol
 
The first (but not last) keg of F1C4 NEIPA was destroyed in fairly rapid order, I gave a few tubes to club members, I'll report back on results when I hear back from them. F1 is spinning up for use tomorrow, thanks again!
 
TravelingLight said:
Is the original page with the info of the yeasts down now? My (work) browser just blocked it saying license expired, despite the fact that work has never blocked this site before. Any thoughts? I wanted to re-read some stuff on there.
Click to expand...

If you are talking about my blog, it should be working 😊
 
Thanks to @GRBC for sending me these I was finally able to do a side by side comparison. To my surprise there wasn't much of a difference, at least not a major one that I picked up on. I would have been able to tell them apart due to the sweeter taste but I was hoping for big ester differences.

H1 - Was a bit darker
H1/C4 - Sweeter/maltier.

IMG_1172.JPG
 
Shout out to TravelingLight for hooking me up with the F1 and F1/C4 strains. Here is my rye, NEIPA fermented with the F1 that I dyed pink with beet puree. It looks and tastes like grapefruit juice. Here it is pictured before carbing.20170510_122351 (1).jpg
 
kjb290 said:
Shout out to TravelingLight for hooking me up with the F1 and F1/C4 strains. Here is my rye, NEIPA fermented with the F1 that I dyed pink with beet puree. It looks and tastes like grapefruit juice. Here it is pictured before carbing.View attachment 400119
Click to expand...

Right on brother!! NEIPA...beet puree...sounds like one of Tonsmiere's batches! How did you incorporate the beet puree? And what does it lend to the flavor profile?
 

Similar threads

G
Fermentis BR-8 dry Brettanomyces Experiences
2
Replies
62
Views
7K
Miraculix
Miraculix
F
Hello from the west country
Replies
2
Views
386
foragedbrews
F
M
Safbrew WB-06 for a Belgian Golden Strong ale
2 3
Replies
103
Views
12K
AlcheMania
AlcheMania
MightyMosin
My yeast notes
Replies
3
Views
2K
MightyMosin
MightyMosin
MBuckBrewer
Have Apples Make Cider!
Replies
1
Views
516
MaxStout
MaxStout
Williams Brewing 300

Latest posts

Back
Top