Isolated Yeast (Tree House): How to Identify and Characterize?

CornyKegs 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.
I’m drinking a haze right now, have a head cold and I can really taste a Belgian strong type flavor. Could just be my taste buds out of whack too. When I emailed gigayeast, I wanted to see what they recommended for a TH type beer, in which their response was:

“Although we do have some of Treehouse's proprietary strains banked in our collection for them. We are not allowed to sell them or send out samples to anyone but Treehouse. If you tell me what characteristics you are looking for we might be able to put together a custom blend for you to try.”
 
ThePaleAleIndian said:
I did cold crash mine, but I don't have a filter on the inlet when I rack. Maybe you wouldn't have to cold crash if you have a filter, not sure. As far as the time, 12 days is probably a lot more than I needed, but my 30 psi gauge pegged haha. I ended up giving it plenty of time because I have found that naturally carbing with gyle can give you high diacetyl if you cool to serving temp too early. DME may give you a similar effect, don't know, never tried it. It's possible that you'll need more time to carb up after a cold crash, but according to the data sheet, CBC-1 works down to 55F, so who knows how much of a difference that makes. 3 days seems kind of fast to me though, even with dextrose and no cold crash. Interested to hear about your results!
Click to expand...

I did not cold crash, but I wish I did. The top of the filter is open so I ultimately ended up transferring a little hop matter to my serving keg, likely some yeast too. Pitched 3 grams of CBC1 with 3.35 gm dextrose (a little conservative since I spund after my biotransformation dry hop and I don't know exactly how much carbonation is there. In my experience its only a slight amount). The spunding valve got up to 25 psi at 68 degrees F after a few days and stayed steady so I just started cold crashing this morning. Should be ready to drink on Wednesday, or so I hope. I'll report back then.
 
Last edited:
StinkyBeer said:
Sorry about that weird post^

My experience with Diastaticus is that it will keep munching often up to or beyond 90% AA.

Another thing to factor in is that if you dry hop during fermentation you pretty much always get a leap in attenuation also due to the rousing effect caused by nucleation points.

These 2 points make me doubt wb-06.
Click to expand...

Hi StinkyBeer,

Thanks for the information about Diastaticus strains. I wasn't aware of this. It sounds like it can be a real nasty gene resulting in keg and bottle gushers. I'm even more curious now to see the effects of a late wb-06 addition as an attenuator. Hopefully I dont ruin a batch of beer while satisfying my curiosity.
 
I've been away from this thread for a couple of months just decided to check back in after brewing 3 or 4 batches, one with 007 and two with Imperial Juice. All of which I felt didn't live up to the batch I did with the s-04, t58 and wb06 mix, probably going to give this mix a try again for my next batch.

What have people that are using the mix with temp control done?
 
Can you elaborate on what the differences were between the liquid and dry batches? What didn’t live up to the expectations I guess? Taste as far as juiciness? I have been considering doing a blend with A38 or London III and blending with the gigayeast Belgian strain GY014.
 
Flavor I felt wasn't the same and I felt like the haze wasn't as good not that haze is a real factor to anything. The mixed batch was almost milky and was probably the best beer I've ever made
 
What amounts of each did you go with? Some people are noticing too much T-58 takes a front row seat.
 
mrodrigues9 said:
Flavor I felt wasn't the same and I felt like the haze wasn't as good not that haze is a real factor to anything. The mixed batch was almost milky and was probably the best beer I've ever made
Click to expand...

Did you post your previous recipe/process in this thread?
 
I believe I used the 2-row and carafoam recipe someone else had posted and have honed it a little bit over time added some flaked wheat, but my last 4 or 5 have been the same recipe

I used S04/T58/WB06:92%/5%/3% if I remember correctly it was a little overpowering on the peppery spicy note to begin with but that eventually fell off I may try and go with a little less of the T58, was also thinking maybe now that I have temp control which I didn't have last time I might be able to neutralize the spicy note with temp

Right batch (pinewflash.jpg) was the mixed and the left photo is the imperial juice, mixed batch was thick murky and juicy, it started with a slightly peppery spicy flavor and when that fell off after about a week or so it was awesome.

I honestly don't know why I paid the extra for the liquid yeasts as the S-04 works better, its convinced me to go back to it after the last few brews.
 

Attachments

  • 2441307421437350208.jpg
    2441307421437350208.jpg
    134.1 KB · Views: 138
  • pinewflash.jpg
    pinewflash.jpg
    563 KB · Views: 136
Last edited:
StinkyBeer said:
After drinking a fair few Treehouse beers recently I’m no longer convinced of this yeast blend. Reasons are that:

1, I can pick S-04 tartness and doughy quality a mile off. Treehouse beers have a ph around 4.6 and very little dough/tart character.

2, T-58 dominates the hops even at 3-5% rates.

3, WB-06 is Diastaticus and is a super attenuators easily hitting 85% AA. Treehouse beers seem to finish around 1.015-1.018. Wb-06 also adds a tartness.

Interestingly a guy in this thread seems very confident they use Conan:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/...emperature-range-and-profile-question.645681/

Hmmmmmm
Click to expand...

I'm also curious about this as I pick up S-04's characteristic tartness in any NEIPA I brew with it as the single strain, yet do not get it in Treehouse beers (granted my final pH is a little lower than theirs, despite heavy dry hopping). Are people finding that blending yeast tempers that quality? Personally, I am not a huge fan of it.
 
I know the DNA testing didn’t match with Conan but I have a buddy that’s a great homebrewer and he believes you can get some Belgian character from Conan at low temps. I’ve only used Conan once, and it was my most recent batch, and he said to let it ride high to get more fruity esters. Not sure of y’alls experience with Conan but just something else to add to the mix.

Do y’all get tartness from Conan?

We know Treehouse puts on their growlers that they naturally carb. Could they be dropping out all or most of the Conan and then warming back up a bit to condition and carb and that’s what is picked up in the DNA testing?
 
I’m not saying I guarantee TH is using the dry blend discussed in this thread, only that the DNA analysis of yeast isolated from multiple different cans suggests that (to differing degrees of confidence on each strain).

What I don’t understand is where is there any evidence that they’re using Conan? Friend of a friend said so? Please share if anyone has some.

I do find it very interesting how similar WY1968 and Conan are (both this analysis and NGS papers), yet they perform quite differently in wort. WY1968 even floccs like crazy in starters (egg drop soup) while Conan doesn’t.
 
isomerization said:
What I don’t understand is where is there any evidence that they’re using Conan? Friend of a friend said so? Please share if anyone has some.
Click to expand...

It's possible - it could be that they're using Conan in some beers and Fermentis in others, so if the friend asks specifically "Are you using Conan?" then the answer will come back yes. Also one can imagine that if they've just moved to a swanky new brewery then it may have a proper lab, and they've now switched from buying in dry yeast to managing their own in-house strain like a proper brewery. I'm the wrong side of the Atlantic to know if that's plausible based on what we know of the beers, but people seem to be finding them "different" in some way from the new brewery.

isomerization said:
I do find it very interesting how similar WY1968 and Conan are (both this analysis and NGS papers), yet they perform quite differently in wort. WY1968 even floccs like crazy in starters (egg drop soup) while Conan doesn’t.
Click to expand...

Flocculation is one of the most mutable properties, and it's normal for a brewery strain to have a lot of different flocc mutants. So what you get is hugely dependent on how you crop the yeast - if you're harvesting from a bottle then you're only going to select the mutants that didn't drop out nicely in the brewery. Which kinda fits what we know of the origin of Conan.
 
Northern_Brewer said:
It's possible - it could be that they're using Conan in some beers and Fermentis in others, so if the friend asks specifically "Are you using Conan?" then the answer will come back yes. Also one can imagine that if they've just moved to a swanky new brewery then it may have a proper lab, and they've now switched from buying in dry yeast to managing their own in-house strain like a proper brewery. I'm the wrong side of the Atlantic to know if that's plausible based on what we know of the beers, but people seem to be finding them "different" in some way from the new brewery.

Flocculation is one of the most mutable properties, and it's normal for a brewery strain to have a lot of different flocc mutants. So what you get is hugely dependent on how you crop the yeast - if you're harvesting from a bottle then you're only going to select the mutants that didn't drop out nicely in the brewery. Which kinda fits what we know of the origin of Conan.
Click to expand...

Sure it’s possible, even plausible if other major NE IPA producing breweries are known to use it, but I was just asking for some degree of evidence beyond this dude said so. Maybe that’s all we normally get!

Would you expect the process for selecting (flocc) mutants to result in drastically different phenotypic fermentation profiles? Maybe 1968 and Conan are more similar than I realize, would be fun to try a split batch.
 
Update on the natural carbonation: Huge success. I'd say it adds a great texture and roundness to the beer. It was the closest I've come to the TH mouthfeel. Natural carbonation and a soft water profile will certainly do the trick.
 
isomerization said:
Sure it’s possible, even plausible if other major NE IPA producing breweries are known to use it, but I was just asking for some degree of evidence beyond this dude said so. Maybe that’s all we normally get!
Click to expand...

Pretty much. You need to completely change your plans for your life and go back to being a lab rat... :)

isomerization said:
Would you expect the process for selecting (flocc) mutants to result in drastically different phenotypic fermentation profiles? Maybe 1968 and Conan are more similar than I realize, would be fun to try a split batch.
Click to expand...

Not really, but the isolated history of Conan means it could well have picked up a suitable mutation along the way. Even when strains are closely related, it only takes one mutation to have a really obvious effect on the aroma profile. The most obvious example is T-58, which is close to being a POF+ version of Windsor/S-33 - but those phenolics dominate the profile.

But it would be fun to have side-by-side trials of all the known close relatives of Conan and 1318, since they're within the same broad Whitbread family but not especially closely related.
 
On an unrelated note, I’m planning on keg priming my latest NE IPA. I normally just use boiled table sugar, but wanted to try DME with CBC-1.

Would anyone recommend letting the CBC-1 reach krausen before adding to the keg or would the result be similar to just adding everything into the keg?
 
isomerization said:
On an unrelated note, I’m planning on keg priming my latest NE IPA. I normally just use boiled table sugar, but wanted to try DME with CBC-1.

Would anyone recommend letting the CBC-1 reach krausen before adding to the keg or would the result be similar to just adding everything into the keg?
Click to expand...
I’ve done this. I didn’t let it reach krausen, just rehydrated the yeast in the wort and add to the keg.
 
brewpharm Hill said:
Update on the natural carbonation: Huge success. I'd say it adds a great texture and roundness to the beer. It was the closest I've come to the TH mouthfeel. Natural carbonation and a soft water profile will certainly do the trick.
Click to expand...
How long did you let it carb at room temp?
 
NJGeorge said:
I’ve done this. I didn’t let it reach krausen, just rehydrated the yeast in the wort and add to the keg.
Click to expand...

Did you warm up the keg first? Right now it’s at 34F, so I could rack, purge and allow it to warm up, but then I’d knock out a lot of CO2/aroma...
 
isomerization said:
Did you warm up the keg first? Right now it’s at 34F, so I could rack, purge and allow it to warm up, but then I’d knock out a lot of CO2/aroma...
Click to expand...

When I tried natural carbing in my keg I let it get to room temp to speed up the process. Carbed for 5 days. Honestly it lacked a little carb but I still like it. Once hooked up to gas it added the little extra carb it needed but was still softer than burst carbing. I imagine it’d be fine if you added the slurry to cold beer and then let warm. There’d just be a lag until the beer warmed enough.
 
lilbova3 said:
When I tried natural carbing in my keg I let it get to room temp to speed up the process. Carbed for 5 days. Honestly it lacked a little carb but I still like it. Once hooked up to gas it added the little extra carb it needed but was still softer than burst carbing. I imagine it’d be fine if you added the slurry to cold beer and then let warm. There’d just be a lag until the beer warmed enough.
Click to expand...

Sorry should have clarified that I was asking about keg temp because I was concerned about shocking the yeast. I ended up racking cold beer onto the CBC-1/DME. Will check psi in a couple days, sitting at 68F.
 

Attachments

  • CE0BD2C9-B127-43D5-93D2-3960FFEBE854.jpeg
    CE0BD2C9-B127-43D5-93D2-3960FFEBE854.jpeg
    1.6 MB · Views: 96
elgee said:
Not sure if this is even close to the profile, but I came across this new dry yeast http://www.lallemandbrewing.com/en/united-states/product-details/lalbrew-new-england/. Has anyone tried this one or know what it may contribute to the style? I found somewhere that it is a dry version of Conan, but who knows?
Click to expand...

It gets monitored in the "NE IPA dry yeast" thread. Allegedly it is a dry version of a mixed culture of Conans harvested from beers from two UK breweries (I guess that distance from White Labs/Yeast Bay is helpful from an IP point of view). It's been available in 500g packs for over a year now, but they've been really struggling with viability so have yet to release 11g retail packs. A Lallemand rep told me in November that they would arrive "in the New Year" but they have been "just around the corner" for a year now. It just shows that making dry yeast is not as easy as some people make out.

As linked in that thread, some retailers have given up waiting for the 11g "official" packs and have been unofficially breaking commercial bricks into 25g packs.

So there's no reason not to try it, even if it might benefit from a pinch of T-58 and/or WB-06 etc to liven it up a bit.
 
isomerization said:
Sorry should have clarified that I was asking about keg temp because I was concerned about shocking the yeast. I ended up racking cold beer onto the CBC-1/DME. Will check psi in a couple days, sitting at 68F.
Click to expand...
Ive debated this as well.

Id think that the o2 scavenging would require the f2 to be pretty active if thats a goal. Which it pretty much always should be if you’re opening up vessels on cold side.
 
SanPancho said:
Ive debated this as well.

Id think that the o2 scavenging would require the f2 to be pretty active if thats a goal. Which it pretty much always should be if you’re opening up vessels on cold side.
Click to expand...

Sorry, are you disagreeing with what I did or agreeing?

I’m sure there was plenty of primary yeast still going, but the CBC-1 seemed like insurance.
 
No. Debating the process myself, or at least The steps in process.

Crash or soft crash?
Krauzen the f2 in the priming solution? Just rehydrate? No reydrate?
Do a dry hop concurrently? Few hours later? Dont mix the DH and the priming/spunding?

Too many variables to actually test them all. Hoping someone else has tried one or two paths, can offer opinions, etc.
 
SanPancho said:
No. Debating the process myself, or at least The steps in process.

Crash or soft crash?
Krauzen the f2 in the priming solution? Just rehydrate? No reydrate?
Do a dry hop concurrently? Few hours later? Dont mix the DH and the priming/spunding?

Too many variables to actually test them all.
Click to expand...

Ah gotcha, yeah I just decided that with my set up (can’t do a real closed transfer) that trying anything more complicated likely just increases O2 exposure. I have a hop bag in there too, but that will stay for duration.
 
isomerization said:
Sorry should have clarified that I was asking about keg temp because I was concerned about shocking the yeast. I ended up racking cold beer onto the CBC-1/DME. Will check psi in a couple days, sitting at 68F.
Click to expand...
This was exactly my process, CO2 transfer 37F beer onto CBC-1 and gyle. I have a habit of using too much primer when doing this though, I've ended up pegging my 30 psi gauge at 68F every time haha. In my experience, the pressure started rising right away, but I'm sure the first few psi of pressure rise is just the gas in the keg's headspace coming up to 68F. The pressure rose pretty seamlessly after that though, I didn't see a huge change in pressure rise rate (yeah, I geeked out and measured the pressure often and plotted it with hours since sealing the keg). According to the spec sheet, CBC-1 can work down to 55F. I gave mine 12 days, although I probably didn't have to.
 
ThePaleAleIndian said:
This was exactly my process, CO2 transfer 37F beer onto CBC-1 and gyle. I have a habit of using too much primer when doing this though, I've ended up pegging my 30 psi gauge at 68F every time haha. In my experience, the pressure started rising right away, but I'm sure the first few psi of pressure rise is just the gas in the keg's headspace coming up to 68F. The pressure rose pretty seamlessly after that though, I didn't see a huge change in pressure rise rate (yeah, I geeked out and measured the pressure often and plotted it with hours since sealing the keg). According to the spec sheet, CBC-1 can work down to 55F. I gave mine 12 days, although I probably didn't have to.
Click to expand...

Very nice, thanks for sharing!

My gauge was at 12 psi this morning, but I didn’t take any readings since the transfer, so hard to say if that’s just off gassing or what.
 
So here's a thought I wanted to bounce off all you guys. On the yeast family tree (that also showed commonality between WY1388 and WB-06), S-04 and WLP540 seem to be on the same general branch fairly close to one another. I thought this was interesting, because WLP540 is supposedly the Rochefort strain and is supposedly POF negative, and also because Nate had once referred to Rochefort 8 as his "ah-ha beer."

I guess I have two lines of thought on this. WLP540 seems to fit some of our tasting notes on here, Belgian-ish esters, POF-, etc. Is it possible that what we thought was S-04 was actually something more like WLP540? How close would the PCR ladders be given how close WLP540 and S-04 are on the yeast family tree? Also, can someone who has experience with WLP540 or similar and TH comment on how close the ester character is?
 

Similar threads

Northern_Brewer
From the lab - family tree of White Labs yeast
2
Replies
77
Views
17K
SkiHazy
SkiHazy
Williams Brewing 300

Latest posts

Back
Top