Dry yeasts identified - your opinions please!

[duncan_disorderly]

S-04 is absolutely a Whitbread B derivative. There has never been any doubt about that. Here's the sales info:

"S-04 -This strain comes from Whitbread Brewing Co., and ferments crisp, slightly tart."

Ok that sounds definitive, thanks, but hasn't DNA testing suggested it's something else? I think it was lose to WLP006. Is that a Whitbread derivative?

 

[duncan_disorderly]

Whatever you like, just don't give the impression that yeast not from the same culture are the same as they're not. Microbiology people get fairly picky about that kind of thing, which is why eg 34/70 is treated as a separate strain from W34, even though it was an isolate (in 1970) from the "W34" used at Weihenstephan for about 10 years. In that kind of time you will see mutations and genetic drift.

Yeah I understand. I just think there should be a word for all yeasts that are genetically very similar, probably come from a particular beer or brewery or something, but have very slight variations. Maybe there is a word.

All food producers like to sell themselves on "purity", but yeast producers have a particular interest in it after Left Hand sued White Labs in 2017 for the $m's of business lost to bottle bombs allegedly caused by STA1 contaminants in WLP090. There were also dark rumours going round Bermondsey of contamination in US-05 at around the same time. Certainly Chris Giles of Surebrew knows what he's doing, so if he says he found multiple strains back in the early teens I'd believe him. Whereas the yeast companies do have business to lose and possible lawsuits to fight if they admit that their yeast are not to spec. So it's quite possible that various commercial yeasts were not pure cultures a few years ago, whether through contamination or natural mutation, but they've now been cleaned up.

I'm not sure that argument works. There's a difference between a contaminant that the producer doesn't intend to be there, and a fixed number of 'strains' that are intended to be there, with known and explained behaviours. Breweries buy and use diastatic strains now and avoid disasters with them. If Lallemand were to deliberately combine 2 or 3 strains to produce a product that provided a particular kind of result, like M36 does for example, and explained that on the tin, and how to use that blend correctly to achieve full attenuation etc, then I don't think a lawsuit would occur. There's a no reason why dry yeasts can't be blends or why they must all be single strain, I reckon. And it sounds like MJ do sell blends that contain more than one strain, if the reply from MJ that I mentioned above isn't a made up thing.

 

[bierhaus15]

That doesn't mean it's necessarily the original Whitbread B - Whitbread ran one of the biggest yeast libraries in the world as well as using multiple production strains in multiple breweries, they took over many local breweries many of which had "local" versions of yeasts from head office.

Until we get sequence of NCYC 1026 which for these purposes can be regarded as the canonical Whitbread B, then we won't know for sure.

Lol. Ok, it might not be the "canonical" Whitbread B..... just the dry version of Whitbread B. Any other hairs worth splitting here?

 

[Sebastian Weetabix]

I knew there were "Canons" of the Catholic Church.
Is there a Yeast Cathedral to get the Canonical Yeasts?

 

[ncbrewer]

Unfortunately Lallemand seems to be the only yeast supplier providing diastaticus information at this time (neither Lallemand nor Mangrove Jack specify it as part of their regular product data) so the diastaticus classification would indeed be helpful in identifying yeasts, if only everyone would supply complete and conclusive product data...

I have found diastaticus information on the Fermentis and Lallemand websites. Fermentis has it on Tool #3. For Lallemand, go to the main product page and click " Download LalBrew® Abbaye Technical Data Sheet" This might be new.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Some pages of the Fermentis site appear be broken on some versions of Safari.

Beer fermentation tips and tricks | only for brewers is a good link to get to "Tool #3".

 

[Vale71]

Yeah I understand. I just think there should be a word for all yeasts that are genetically very similar, probably come from a particular beer or brewery or something, but have very slight variations. Maybe there is a word.

There is and the word is "clade". Just substitute "brewery" with "ancestor".

 

[duncan_disorderly]

There is and the word is "clade". Just substitute "brewery" with "ancestor".

I think it's not used enough!

 

[ebbelwoi]

Exchanged a few emails with a Lallemand rep yesterday. He was kind enough to confirm two things I'd read on hobbybrauer.de:

Diamond is a Frohberg strain, Doemens 308 to be specific.
Munich Classic is the Andechs strain.

I had already read about the Diamond-308 connection in a Reddit post by Andreas Krennmair (I believe he calls it the dry version of WY2308), and elsewhere on hobbybrauer. I was a bit surprised about the MC-Andechs connection, though, as I'd read quite a few posts claiming that Munich Classic was the dry equivalent of WLP300/WY3068/W68. The interesting part about that comes courtesy of this thread, in which the Weihenstephan yeast bank recommends W175 (WLP351/WY3638) to a customer who's looking for something similar to what Kloster Andechs uses.

 

[thehaze]

Exchanged a few emails with a Lallemand rep yesterday. He was kind enough to confirm two things I'd read on hobbybrauer.de:

Diamond is a Frohberg strain, Doemens 308 to be specific.
Munich Classic is the Andechs strain.

I had already read about the Diamond-308 connection in a Reddit post by Andreas Krennmair (I believe he calls it the dry version of WY2308), and elsewhere on hobbybrauer. I was a bit surprised about the MC-Andechs connection, though, as I'd read quite a few posts claiming that Munich Classic was the dry equivalent of WLP300/WY3068/W68. The interesting part about that comes courtesy of this thread, in which the Weihenstephan yeast bank recommends W175 (WLP351/WY3638) to a customer who's looking for something similar to what Kloster Andechs uses.

So Munich Classic is the Andechs strain or close to it then. I've found a few threads on the web suggesting it might be a Weihenstephaner derivative.

 

[ebbelwoi]

So where does everyone stand on M54? I used it recently in an amber lager and was quite pleased with it. MJ yeast is hard to find in Japan, so if possible, I'd like to find it under its original label.

Some people thought M54 might be K-97. I've used them both, and K-97 seemed more powdery, and definitely had a taller krausen.

Others said M54 might be Mauribrew Lager 497. I don't have any experience with 497. Is it S. pastorianus? Is M54 pastorianus or cerevisiae?

 

[Miraculix]

So where does everyone stand on M54? I used it recently in an amber lager and was quite pleased with it. MJ yeast is hard to find in Japan, so if possible, I'd like to find it under its original label.

Some people thought M54 might be K-97. I've used them both, and K-97 seemed more powdery, and definitely had a taller krausen.

Others said M54 might be Mauribrew Lager 497. I don't have any experience with 497. Is it S. pastorianus? Is M54 pastorianus or cerevisiae?

My guess is that it's probably Mauribrew. But one other option would be diamond lager from Lallemand, I read in the warm fermented later thread that people fermented it warm with success.

Be careful with 54, if you don't pitch enough yeast, it will take forever to ferment. Otherwise, great yeast.

 

[ebbelwoi]

My guess is that it's probably Mauribrew. But one other option would be diamond lager from Lallemand, I read in the warm fermented later thread that people fermented it warm with success.

Be careful with 54, if you don't pitch enough yeast, it will take forever to ferment. Otherwise, great yeast.

Does it look like a proper bottom-fermenting yeast to you? You seem to have done a lot of batches with it.

I have my doubts about M54 being Diamond (Doemens 308), but I've got no information to back it up. Could S-189 be a possibility? Financially, MJ would probably have the highest profit margin if they used Mauri 497, I'd imagine.

 

[Miraculix]

Does it look like a proper bottom-fermenting yeast to you? You seem to have done a lot of batches with it.

I have my doubts about M54 being Diamond (Doemens 308), but I've got no information to back it up. Could S-189 be a possibility? Financially, MJ would probably have the highest profit margin if they used Mauri 497, I'd imagine.

I did a lot of warm lagers and none of them looked bottom fermenting at warmer temperatures. There is no real bottom fermenting yeast, it's a question of temperature not of yeast type.

Fermentis does not sell to repackers afaik, Lallemand and Mauri both seem to do this on a regular basis.

I never was able to get hold of Mauri, but from what I've read about it, I would say it sounds like a match.

 

[ebbelwoi]

Fermentis does not sell to repackers afaik, Lallemand and Mauri both seem to do this on a regular basis.

The Cellar Science line at More Beer as well as the Morgan's Premium yeast line in Australia both appear to be Fermentis repacks. Morgan's lifts some of the descriptions word for word.

If only we could get someone with access to Mauri 497 to do a side-by-side batch with M54...

 

[ebbelwoi]

Be careful with 54, if you don't pitch enough yeast, it will take forever to ferment. Otherwise, great yeast.

I've been doing some checking on Mauri 497, and some of the data sheets recommend a 2.5-5g/10L pitch rate. Based on what others have posted, I get the impression that a pitch rate that low wouldn't give you very good results with M54.

 

[Miraculix]

I've been doing some checking on Mauri 497, and some of the data sheets recommend a 2.5-5g/10L pitch rate. Based on what others have posted, I get the impression that a pitch rate that low wouldn't give you very good results with M54.

OK, then I have no idea anymore what it could be ...

 

[frankvw]

My guess is that it's probably Mauribrew. But one other option would be diamond lager from Lallemand

I agree with your assessment that it's most likely Mauri brew 496. Diamond Lager is less likely, on the basis of the fact that the latter is specified as a Pastorianus strain.. But then, MJ is known for having their specs wrong, and performance reports from the field suggest that it could be Diamond.

 

[ebbelwoi]

I've been trying to find someone who'll ship a 12.5g packet of Mauribrew 497 to Japan, but have had no luck. I did find this, though. The directions on the packet which specify 11-15L of wort (about 10g/10L) are different from the 497 datasheets (2.5-5g/10L) I've seen.

If I ever get my hands on the Mauri 497, maybe I can do a 3-way split batch.

 

[ebbelwoi]

While we're (I'm?) on the topic, I've been researching Mauribrew Weiss 1433, and it seems to have the same recommended fermentation temperature range of 15-30C as Mangrove Jack's M20 Bavarian Wheat. Coincidence?

https://www.brouwland.com/content/d...8 en 050.514.9_SPEC_EN_Bavarian Wheat M20.pdfhttps://www.murphyandson.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Yeast-Mauribrew-Weiss-Yeast.pdf
Both also appear to end up clearer than typical hefeweizen yeasts. The batch I did with M20 certainly did.

 

[frankvw]

While we're (I'm?) on the topic, I've been researching Mauribrew Weiss 1433, and it seems to have the same recommended fermentation temperature range of 15-30C as Mangrove Jack's M20 Bavarian Wheat. Coincidence?

It depends on which specs you look at. Different versions of specs exist for the same yeast, which muddies the waters considerably. What I have here specified 15-30C (18-24 recommended) for Mauri 1433, 18-30 for M20 and 18-15 for M21. But MJ especially have issued wildly varying specs for their strains over the years.

From what I can see, M20 could be Lallemand Munich Classic Ale wheat OR Mauri 1433, while M21 could be Lallemand Munich Wheat Ale OR Mauri 1433. It's confusing...

 

[ebbelwoi]

It depends on which specs you look at. Different versions of specs exist for the same yeast, which muddies the waters considerably. What I have here specified 15-30C (18-24 recommended) for Mauri 1433, 18-30 for M20 and 18-15 for M21. But MJ especially have issued wildly varying specs for their strains over the years.

From what I can see, M20 could be Lallemand Munich Classic Ale wheat OR Mauri 1433, while M21 could be Lallemand Munich Wheat Ale OR Mauri 1433. It's confusing...

If you take a closer look at the Brouwland M20 pdf, you'll see that it reads 59-86°F (18-30°C). I think the 18C is a typo, as 59F is actually 15C. Also, the "8" is just above the "5" on a numeric keypad.

Another funny thing is that the famous Brau! article on hefeweizen has this to say about the two yeasts:

• Mauribrew Weiss: Classic Bavarian Weissbier displaying well balanced clove and banana flavours. Slight tendency to produce sulfuric notes.
• Mangrove Jack’s Bavarian Wheat: Balanced Weissbier with subtle banana and rather low clove flavours

The Mauri literature on Weiss that I've seen says little to no phenolics. I wonder how reliable that Brau! assessment is.

I finally found an online shop that would send me some Mauribrew sachets. I ordered the Lager and the Weiss. I'm planning to do a split batch of the Lager and M54. I'm also considering a split batch of Mauribrew Weiss and M20, but I don't know if I want to waste the time and effort, because if they're the same (which I suspect they are), I doubt I'll be pleased with the results.

 

[Miraculix]

If you take a closer look at the Brouwland M20 pdf, you'll see that it reads 59-86°F (18-30°C). I think the 18C is a typo, as 59F is actually 15C. Also, the "8" is just above the "5" on a numeric keypad.

Another funny thing is that the famous Brau! article on hefeweizen has this to say about the two yeasts:


The Mauri literature on Weiss that I've seen says little to no phenolics. I wonder how reliable that Brau! assessment is.

I finally found an online shop that would send me some Mauribrew sachets. I ordered the Lager and the Weiss. I'm planning to do a split batch of the Lager and M54. I'm also considering a split batch of Mauribrew Weiss and M20, but I don't know if I want to waste the time and effort, because if they're the same (which I suspect they are), I doubt I'll be pleased with the results.

Looking forward to the results!

 

[frankvw]

If you take a closer look at the Brouwland M20 pdf, you'll see that it reads 59-86°F (18-30°C). I think the 18C is a typo, as 59F is actually 15C. Also, the "8" is just above the "5" on a numeric keypad.

Ehm... Isn't that what I just said?

What I have here specified 15-30C (18-24 recommended) for Mauri 1433, 18-30 for M20 and 18-15 for M21.

So yes, M20 is specified at 18-30C. Although I see I did make a typo; M21 is specified at 18-25, not 18-15 (obviously).

I'm going by MJ's original data, BTW, not by data copied by 3rd parties. And such a wide range is not unusual for a Weizen yeast.

Looking forward to the results of your test fermentations!!

 

[ebbelwoi]

Ehm... Isn't that what I just said?

I don't think so, but maybe I missed something.

I was trying to point out a typo in the M20 literature which appears both in the Brouwland link I shared and on the MJ site:

Ferment at 18-30 degrees C (59-86 degrees F) for best results.

30C is 86F. No problem there. However, 18C is not 59F. Either the 18 or the 59 is an error. If the 59F is correct (the equivalent is 15C), then you'd have 15-30C in both the Mauri specs and the MJ specs. No other hefeweizen yeast specs, dry or liquid, mention such a wide range, and no other yeast specs have that exact match. Do you see what I mean now?

 

[frankvw]

Do you see what I mean now?

I need a beer...

 

[Miraculix]

I need a beer...

#metoo

 

[Kold Brygg]

Awesome work here.

Lallemand Verdant isn't much debated here I've read elsewhere it's close or the same strain as WY1318, WLP013

 

[CascadesBrewer]

Lallemand Verdant isn't much debated here I've read elsewhere it's close or the same strain as WY1318, WLP013

WLP013 London Ale is definitely not WY1318 London Ale III. Many lists have WLP013 being the same as WY1028 London Ale...but not @dmtaylor's list.

I have a pack of Lallemand Verdant that I want to try. From what I hear it has some different flavors than WY1318 but they have the same origin.

 

[kmarkstevens]

@Miraculix You might want to weigh in here on Verdant yeast experiences highlighted in the AK thread.

 

[Miraculix]

@Miraculix You might want to weigh in here on Verdant yeast experiences highlighted in the AK thread.

I don't know which one of the liquid yeasts it is, but there's one 100% match, just don't remember which one. I think it was called London three, never used the liquid version myself but both yeasts have this massive krausen which is rather unique and they both taste and ferment the same way.

Verdant is soooo good, I love it. Best English dry yeast ever. Really really nice esters.

 

[Kold Brygg]

WLP013 London Ale is definitely not WY1318 London Ale III. Many lists have WLP013 being the same as WY1028 London Ale...but not @dmtaylor's list.

I have a pack of Lallemand Verdant that I want to try. From what I hear it has some different flavors than WY1318 but they have the same origin.

Thanks for clarifying.

I wasn't aware of the Verdant qualities, so I will do a 50/50 Nottingham/ Windsor for my next beer.

But more importantly is the latest version of @dmtaylor the one listed in the second post? Apperently last updated sept 2019.

 

[dmtaylor]

Thanks for clarifying.

I wasn't aware of the Verdant qualities, so I will do a 50/50 Nottingham/ Windsor for my next beer.

But more importantly is the latest version of @dmtaylor the one listed in the second post? Apperently last updated sept 2019.

Sorry, no, the one in #2 is an old version. Try the one in #168 instead:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/thread...ur-opinions-please.670466/page-5#post-8759588
Or here is the direct link:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16XRUloO3WXqH9Ixsf5vx2DIKDmrEQJ36tLRBmmya7Jo/edit?usp=sharing
Last updated last night.

 

[tizoc]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16XRUloO3WXqH9Ixsf5vx2DIKDmrEQJ36tLRBmmya7Jo/edit?usp=sharing

Iteresting about US-05 not being either WY1056 nor WLP001. Always heard it was one of those.

Do others think M54 and K-97 are the same yeast?

I have only used M54 once (recently, and I don't think I will use it again), but to me M54 and K-97 (which I haven't used lately, but I used it quite often some time ago) are not alike, neither in result, nor how they look during fermentation (K-97 has a very particular krausen, and when I used M54 it didn't look like K-97).

 

[dmtaylor]

Iteresting about US-05 not being either WY1056 nor WLP001. Always heard it was one of those.

Do others think M54 and K-97 are the same yeast?

I have only used M54 once (recently, and I don't think I will use it again), but to me M54 and K-97 (which I haven't used lately, but I used it quite often some time ago) are not alike, neither in result, nor how they look during fermentation (K-97 has a very particular krausen, and when I used M54 it didn't look like K-97).

US-05 is derived from 1056 but is MUCH more highly attenuative. Otherwise it gives similar flavors. And WLP001 gives a similar character to 1056 but is genetically very different. For most intents and purposes, it is actually probably too close to tell the difference. Do genetics matter? That's up to you.

You may be right about M54. Of one thing I am pretty sure is that it is the same as Mauri 497 "Lager". While some characteristics seem similar to K-97, I'll admit these might not be exactly the same. Note: Mangrove Jack doesn't make their own yeast; they just repackage yeasts from other companies. Therefore, their yeast HAS to fit someplace else on the chart, and this was the spot that seemed to fit the best, which includes Mauri 497, and since the other companies like to copy one another, *might* include K-97 and Lallemand Koln. Great questions, which can be tweaked later if we get better evidence one way or another.

 

[tbaldwin000]

Last updated last night.

Righty, rows 97 and 98, let's get those cleared up.

M66 Hophead is absolutely NOT the same yeast as Verdant IPA. M66 Hophead is M42 with some added powdered glucosidase enzyme.

Verdant IPA, for all intents and purposes, is Wyeast 1318. It derives as an isolate from a serial repitch of that yeast. It has taken on some of its own character, but that is its one and only lineage. WLP066 also belongs to this family, though likely not directly from 1318, unlike Verdant.

Lalbrew New England is Conan, we don't know which isolate it was taken from, but the white labs equivalent would be WLP095, or WLP4000 from the Yeast Bay.

Edit: This comment has a stern and condescending tone, apologies that wasn't my intent. I'm an investor in Verdant and speak with James Heffron (co-founder, head brewer) on discord from time to time. Obviously he knows the source of his own yeast, and until recently they also used Lalbrew New England, which is how I am so sure of the source of that one too. As for M66, that was a suspicion that Mangrove didn't deny when I asked them.

 

[dmtaylor]

Thanks @tbaldwin000, I shall take some deeper looks at these when I have time.

I had heard about M66 having added enzyme. I just don't know for sure the real source, if that's M42 or something else.

I realize Verdant is an isolate of 1318, but since it is a little different now (evolved), I'm keeping these separated, for now anyway.

I don't have Conan on my chart yet for some reason and will probably have to add it.

To others who look at my list at a later date: By the time you pull it up, this stuff *might* already be fixed.

Cheers.

 

[tizoc]

I had heard about M66 having added enzyme. I just don't know for sure the real source, if that's M42 or something else. If you don't mind my asking, what is your source of info?

I don't know about the source, but it being a "yeast/enzyme blend" is part of the description they give.

A yeast enzyme blend that enhances aromatics and esters, perfect for New England, hazy and fruit forward IPAs. Select enzymes improve aroma and flavour from late hop and fruit additions.

M66 Hophead Ale Yeast is suitable for New England IPAs, Juicy IPAs, Hazy IPAs, American IPAs, American Pale Ales and more.

Attenuation, flocculation, fermentation temperature, etc look more similar to M44 than to M42 btw.

 

[tbaldwin000]

I had heard about M66 having added enzyme. I just don't know for sure the real source, if that's M42 or something else. If you don't mind my asking, what is your source of info?

I have added an edit to my post regarding how I 'know' these things, and also a note to say that I came across like a bit of a dick, so I'm sorry about that.

 

[tbaldwin000]

Attenuation, flocculation, fermentation temperature, etc look more similar to M44 than to M42 btw.

I...disagree?

Certainly they didn't deny my suspicions when I emailed (or confirm).

It has the same upper attenuation limit and temp range as M42, same flocculation too. All they've done, as far as I can see, is slightly fiddle the lower end numbers for temperature and attenuation. FWIW M42 (Nottingham) is probably more suited to hazy IPA than M44, as it has high beta-lyase enzyme activity, which cleaves bound thiols. Blend that with something to release bound linalool and geraniol (glucosidase enzyme powder), and you have a decent simulation of what Verdant IPA does through its natural characteristics alone.