Ok. I brewed a milk stout and then aged it on raspberries. After two weeks all was fine (taste, smell and appearance) and I transferred to secondary with cocoa nibs. Now after a week with the nibs I have a strange looking brew. Is it infected?View attachment ImageUploadedByHome Brew1453159424.413715.jpgView attachment ImageUploadedByHome Brew1453159436.327563.jpg
Is it infected and by what?
- Thread starter Rehlgood
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
TheBigLebrewsk1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2015
- Messages
- 207
- Reaction score
- 28
Looks uncanningly like the bottom of a fish tank.
Did soak the nibs in vodka or just straight in?
douglasbarbin
Well-Known Member
Looks like a pellicle to me
Big oxygen rich headspace in the secondary vessel.
That's a good way to stack the deck in favor of oxygen loving microbes. Bad luck, sure looks like a microbial biofilm aka pellicle.
Secondaries, if and when you use them, should be filled all the way to the neck. Just like a bottle of beer or wine. This reduces surface area and available oxygen.
No way to identify a specific microbe based on a macro or micro scale image. Lactobacilli or Aceterobacter species would be the likeliest candidates though.
That's a good way to stack the deck in favor of oxygen loving microbes. Bad luck, sure looks like a microbial biofilm aka pellicle.
Secondaries, if and when you use them, should be filled all the way to the neck. Just like a bottle of beer or wine. This reduces surface area and available oxygen.
No way to identify a specific microbe based on a macro or micro scale image. Lactobacilli or Aceterobacter species would be the likeliest candidates though.
bluue13
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2009
- Messages
- 28
- Reaction score
- 1
I wonder....could it be coagulated fat from the nibs? Just a crazy thought.
Aside from that I'd say if you didnt sanitize/soak the nibs in a neutral spirit as was stated above its quite possibly a microbial infection. Sucks. Always hate to see a brew get ruined.
Aside from that I'd say if you didnt sanitize/soak the nibs in a neutral spirit as was stated above its quite possibly a microbial infection. Sucks. Always hate to see a brew get ruined.
You have alcohol in there - that should protect you from almost everything.
Don't worry about it, taste it, and if it tastes fine, prime, bottle, and drink.
Probably just fats from the nibs and not an issue.
You could have lacto, pedio, or brett, but all are slow working in an alcohol environment, that you could drink the lot before you notice anything - might be best not to store for a long time if you really are concerned.
The only infection that could have a big impact on the beer is acetobacter (vinegar). If you have that you will know it by tasting it, and it will not improve.
Again, taste it, if fine, bottle and drink.
Don't worry about it, taste it, and if it tastes fine, prime, bottle, and drink.
Probably just fats from the nibs and not an issue.
You could have lacto, pedio, or brett, but all are slow working in an alcohol environment, that you could drink the lot before you notice anything - might be best not to store for a long time if you really are concerned.
The only infection that could have a big impact on the beer is acetobacter (vinegar). If you have that you will know it by tasting it, and it will not improve.
Again, taste it, if fine, bottle and drink.
That ice raft looking stuff is definitely a pellicle IMO. There is not way to tell what the infection is. I dont think you properly sanitized your cacao nibs
I would keep a VERY close eye on those bottles. They have a good chance of continuing to ferment from the infection and exploding
I would keep a VERY close eye on those bottles. They have a good chance of continuing to ferment from the infection and exploding
brrman
Well-Known Member
Definitely a pellicle.
Acetobacter and Lactobacillus are environmentally common on cocoa beans. Natural fermentation of cocoa beans is typical in chocolate production for certain flavors, and acetobacter and lactobacillis are the common natural microbes used. Looks like you tossed them in without killing the bugs.
Lactic Acid = sour/tart taste (not aerobic specific so will continue to ferment in bottles)
Acetic Acid = vinegar (aerobic, so bottling will slow the infection once headspace is consumed)
Acetobacter and Lactobacillus are environmentally common on cocoa beans. Natural fermentation of cocoa beans is typical in chocolate production for certain flavors, and acetobacter and lactobacillis are the common natural microbes used. Looks like you tossed them in without killing the bugs.
Lactic Acid = sour/tart taste (not aerobic specific so will continue to ferment in bottles)
Acetic Acid = vinegar (aerobic, so bottling will slow the infection once headspace is consumed)
brrman
Well-Known Member
Acetobacter growth will slow severely when under 60F.
Not sure about Lacto. I know that Lacto slows down just by having the beer finished fermentation (the alcohol slows it down).
Since you have just bottled it's no good to cool them down or they won't carbonate. I would keep them in a box, sitting in a plastic container, out of the way of normal traffic. If they don't explode in a couple weeks you should be good (though it might not taste good).
Not sure about Lacto. I know that Lacto slows down just by having the beer finished fermentation (the alcohol slows it down).
Since you have just bottled it's no good to cool them down or they won't carbonate. I would keep them in a box, sitting in a plastic container, out of the way of normal traffic. If they don't explode in a couple weeks you should be good (though it might not taste good).
I'm sorry, but most of this is just plain incorrect information. The alcohol helps against certain types of bacteria, but certainly not "almost everything."
There are tons of different types of lacto, pedio, brett (aka wild yeast, which there are more than just brett), and acetobacter. All of which can continue to eat the complex sugars in an alcohol-rich environment. Check out the "Post your infection" thread for proof of that.
Yes the acetobacter will start producing vinegar, but if it's not the style he's going for, or if it's some really funky bacteria or wild yeast, then it's possible anything will be bad for the beer.
OP, as others have said, especially Gavin, the problem is the amount of headspace in your secondary, mixed with that you need to either soak the cacao in some kind of strong alcohol (typically done in vodka because it's the most "neutral"), or baked prior to adding them to secondary. If you did purge, then it's likely more of the latter.
After they have been in the bottle for 2-3 weeks, start checking the carbonation. If it's where you are expecting it to be, then it would be advised to put them all in the fridge. It will significantly slow the process, but you would still have a time limit (in other words, you don't want to be aging them for a year or anything).
Rehlgood
Well-Known Member
I completely agree with all of this. What it comes down to is my lax methods finally bit me in the a$$. Even though I have used nibs 10 times without sanitizing them and no problems this was bound to happen. Fortunately I can take away a lot of experience from this, and the beer is still has no ill affect. I will keep my eye on it and get it into the fridge asap.
It is not incorrect information! Every beer you brew is infected. It is only the alcohol, and maybe some hops, that prevents the infection from ruining the beer. I'd say that supports the position that alcohol protects the beer from most things. There are some infections that will still develop with alcohol present, but for the most part they are slow to develop; that's why I suggested he doesn't keep the beer too long.
I'd be curious to know your definition of infected. I'm guessing I'm not the only one. Clearly we have vastly differing understandings of the term in relation to beer.
I agree, actually, that there's not any real way to eradicate every single bacteria or wild yeast from our beer. But it's not the hops and the alcohol stopping them from ruining the beer. It's the fact that the yeast we are pitching has billions more cells than the infectious cells, and outperforms them and eats up most of the sugars and oxygen before those bacteria have a chance to propagate. Especially in an average-sized beer, there's really not enough alcohol to pose a danger. It's why you should soak nibs and other types of adjuncts added post-boil in a distilled liquor and not a beer.
I don't disagree that those are slow to develop. But at the point that the OP is showing us in his picture, they've already developed a pellicle, which means they've done quite a bit of reproduction already. This is likely due to the fact that he didn't "sanitize" the nibs, and all of the extra head space.
Even to say there are "some" infections that will develop in the presence of alcohol and hops is misleading. There are lots that will.
I'm not disputing that he should take care of those bottles as soon as possible (read, drink them up quickly!), but to say that his chances of getting an infection post-fermentation are low, and that it likely wasn't any kind of infection, was what I had issue with.
This is where we probably disagree, and are approaching this differently. I don't think he has an infection. It looks like some solid material to me, like some type of fat.
So in one post you don't think he has an infection.
Then, in response to my post, you say it's why you suggested that he bottle right away.
Then you go back to saying you don't believe it's an infection.
Interesting.
Look closely and it's not solid. It's the almost typical, albeit quite small, "broken ice pack" look. I've used cacao nibs on several occasions and never once had the fats solidify like to the point of creating a white film on top of the beer.
douglasbarbin
Well-Known Member
I am almost 100% sure that's an infection.
I'm 100%
Dirt_McGirt
"We got food stamps. Glad to get the food stamps."
I concede to your prolific level of confidence
You don't happened to be in relation to Joe do you?
Dirt_McGirt
"We got food stamps. Glad to get the food stamps."
Dirt_McGirt
"We got food stamps. Glad to get the food stamps."
I never have, and never will be related to anyone named Joe.
Except Stalin. I forget his name was Joe since I always called him Pop Pop.
Actually, I've already gotten a PM this week from someone asking if I knew their friend from near me whose last name was McGirt. For the record no - it's a silly alias the rapper Old Dirty Bastard used to use. Same goes for the ridiculous quote about food stamps under my SN.
Gotcha, then it doesn't seem that you understood who I was talking about. Which is even more surprising with the newfound information that you're an ODB fan, because it should be from your time as well.
Stupid joke, please carry on with the infectious stuff.
Dirt_McGirt
"We got food stamps. Glad to get the food stamps."
Wait, were you talking about Joe Dirt? That's like asking Marshall Faulk if he's related to Thurgood Marshall.
I assumed the _ meant it was last name first.
Dirt_McGirt
"We got food stamps. Glad to get the food stamps."
Ah, gotcha.
Similar threads
