Improving Flocculation After Primary

[evanos]

So, I've just brewed with WLP029 for the first time, and I'm noticing that it has amazing flocculation capability. So, here's what I'm thinking, and here's what I'm wondering.

I'm thinking, flocculation probably has to do with certain glycoproteins on the yeast cell membrane (that's what I would assume given the way many unicellulars floc). What I'm not sure is how those proteins interact. Glycoprotein to glycoprotein? Glycoprotein to another surface protein? Glycoprotein to lipid membrane? I have no clue.

So, what I'm wondering is, if I ferment in primary with a lower floccing yeast, then inoculate my secondary with a high flocculating yeast, will the high floc yeast interact with the low floc yeast and pull it down?

My thinking is that if I ferment with something WLP001 (decent flocculation from what I've seen), then go to secondary with WLP029 (excellent floc, from what I've seen), then the beer should clear up quicker and end up cleaner. Or maybe doing secondary for a while, then inoculating with Kolsch for bottling to improve carbonation without significantly impacting clarity when pouring the beer.

Idk, just askin' cuz I figured someone would have an idea.

Thanks guys and gals!

 

[windbreaker123]

Why pitch twice ? If you interested in flocculation pitch the yeast you want. It will still be there in a secondary and will floc out after bottling or kegging.

 

[evanos]

Well, originally my idea with pitching twice was because I've got a bad habit of leaving beers in secondary long enough as to hinder carbonation, so I thought it'd be good to repitch with a clean yeast for bottle conditioning. Also, I know some breweries (ie, Bridgeport) inoc and bottle condition with a different yeast than was used for primary.

 

[El_Exorcisto]

Don't secondary... It's generally bad practice these days.

 

[Calder]

Well, originally my idea with pitching twice was because I've got a bad habit of leaving beers in secondary long enough as to hinder carbonation, so I thought it'd be good to repitch with a clean yeast for bottle conditioning. Also, I know some breweries (ie, Bridgeport) inoc and bottle condition with a different yeast than was used for primary.

How long do you leave it in secondary. I've left them for 6 months with no problem.

Many breweries filter their beer then add back the original (or other yeast) to aid bottle conditioning. Makes for a more consistent product.

Don't secondary... It's generally bad practice these days.

I disagree with the statement "It's generally bad practice". I agree it is not wise to take it off the yeast too soon, but leaving it on the yeast for extended periods, or conditioning at high temperatures (Belgians), can result in autolysis.

For some people, in the summer (hot weather), it can be essential to use a secondary if they are not going to bottle within a month.

Secondaries are also useful if you want to add spices, fruit, or dry hops, and you want to harvest the yeast.

 

[evanos]

Don't secondary... It's generally bad practice these days.

What are you talking about?

EDIT: Sorry, I don't mean to sound like a ******, but I've never heard this. I'm interested to hear what you mean.

 

[GuldTuborg]

^^^ Searching will turn up a mountain of debates over this. Some people do extended primary fermentations (on the yeast cake) with no reported problems, some claim otherwise. My advice - try it and find out for yourself if it makes a difference. Don't bother listening to anyone else.

 

[El_Exorcisto]

evanos, the theory behind getting the beer off the yeast to prevent autolysis definitely had merit back in the days before the understanding of proper yeast handling. Now, however, you really shouldn't have a problem leaving beer on the yeast for months, maybe even years. I drank a bottle of Ommegang from their inaugural year, last year. It had not been handled well besides being kept out of the sun. Every summer it hit an easy 90* and every winter it almost froze in the upstairs of my father's shop. That yeast hit high temperatures, under ~4 volumes of CO2, at 8.2% ABV. If autolysis were a concern at all, that beer would have been utterly undrinkable. So to worry about putting beer in secondary after a few weeks, even in the heat of summer, is ludicrous.

Te only use a secondary has is to keep your cake clean for harvest if you are dry hopping et al. There have been reports of barleywines here on the forum left on the cake for 6 or more months without any off flavors. It is outdated theory that someone really needs to put a bullet in. Unfortunately the homebrew suppliers give a sales pitch about needing secondaries so they can sell glass carboys at absurd prices.

 

[evanos]

I guess my understanding of going to secondary was more an issue of minimizing the amount of yeast that ends up getting into the bottle (or keg) when filtering isn't possible, not just for the purpose of preventing autolysis.

 

[El_Exorcisto]

evanos, if you bottle condition then you are going to end up with the same amount of yeast regardless, since it will propagate all over again in the bottle. If you are force carbing, then a cold crash on the yeast accomplishes the same goal as putting into secondary.