Yeast from secondary better than yeast from primary?

[COLObrewer]

Was just wondering if washed yeast from secondary is more/less viable than washed yeast from primary? I've been washing all the yeast I can from my initial fermentations of the wild juniper berry yeast I've been propagating. https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f163/can-i-culture-yeast-juniper-berries-169156/
There is more available from the primary than the secondary and I know they are both viable and the yeast from secondary is easier to clean, but is one better than the other in some way?

Keep on yeasting my friends

 

[ArcaneXor]

I prefer starter yeast for propagation, but primary yeast is definitely better than secondary yeast.

 

[HalfPint]

That's a good question.

Personally, I don't see why secondary yeast would be healthier/unhealthier than primary yeast considering if it's dropped out, it's gone dormant. I personally rarely use a secondary, so I don't every wash yeast from it, but I have in the past, and agree that it's got far less trub in it. Therefore, making it easier to wash, as you previously said.

 

[doctorRobert]

I've always read that you want to use the secondary yeast as it'll be cleaner. I dont have enough experience washing yeast to say otherwise. Nor do I think the yeast in the 2ndary would be inferior to the primaries yeast.

 

[Clayton]

Well I don’t do secondaries for the most part so the yeast I save is 50% trub , but it works just fine.. however a case could be made that the yeast in secondary has higher attenuation and slower flocculation being that is still floating around working in the secondary.

 

[SumnerH]

I've read that you want primary yeast because it's more highly flocculant.
I've read that you want secondary yeast because it's cleaner.

Personally I've had no problems washing yeast from the primary and using it. YMMV.

 

[piteko]

I've read that you want primary yeast because it's more highly flocculant.
I've read that you want secondary yeast because it's cleaner.

My personal experience: I always clean from the secondary because it's easier, but after 5 batches done with the same yeast, I see it's less flocculant as it was at the start.
That said, I can't say if the same yeast used 5 times from the primary would be more flocculant from the one taken from the secondary.

Bye,
Marcello

 

[petep1980]

It makes sense it would be slower floccing yeast, but I can't imagine otherwise being inferior or superior. There will be less of it though.

 

[Yooper]

I've always read that you want to use the secondary yeast as it'll be cleaner. I dont have enough experience washing yeast to say otherwise. Nor do I think the yeast in the 2ndary would be inferior to the primaries yeast.

I disagree. The secondary yeast may be "cleaner", but it will be the least flocculant, most stressed yeast out of the entire batch.

You want yeast from the primary. That's the "healthiest" yeast. The stuff from the secondary is less flocculant, and it's been swimming in an alcohol rich environment much longer. The stuff from the bottom of the secondary may look cleaner, with less trub, but it's not something that I'd want to propagate.

 

[piteko]

Reading some other posts and articles and joining their infos with this thread is leading me to a new perspective that I think I'll apply to the next batch:
- make a batch with a brand new yeast;
- clean the first fermenter yeast, which comes in high quantity;
- divide the high quantity yeast to 5-6 little bottles;
- use a new bottle every time I need to make a starter.

Pros:
- every time a second generation yeast to use, avoiding genetic derive;
- the whole yeast cleaning operation has to be done just once.

Cons:
- many little bottles in the fridge;
- older yeasts to wake up (but I never had this problem, even with 1 year old yeasts).

What you think?

Bye,
Marcello

 

[Baldy_Beer_Brewery]

I've always been skeptical of the stressed yeast claims. There is obviously more yeast at the bottom of the primary than secondary, but people successfully propagate yeast from bottle conditioned beers. The only way I could see it making a difference is if the yeast that survives until secondary carries traits that are not desirable. But on the other hand it would appear that the secondary yeast are in fact the stronger more alcohol tolerant yeast.

At any rate, I suspect that cell count in the starter for a proper pitching rate is more important than if the yeast came from primary, secondary or bottle dregs.

 

[petep1980]

but people successfully propagate yeast from bottle conditioned beers..

+1 Ding Ding Ding Ding.

That was my thought process. Just make sure you properly start it and I refuse to believe it'll be inferior.

 

[COLObrewer]

In my experience I've found that yeast is alot more resilient than certain people want us to believe, I mean the juniper berry yeast(s) I've been using have obviously survived temperature extremes of weeks at 100F and months at freezing and below, this is without any human preparation (in the wild on the berries on the trees), etc. In fact wouldn't all yeast have to survive/thrive in similar extremes, heat, cold, moisture, dryness? Doesn't all yeast ultimately come from natural sources? I guess it's probably different when it's hydrated as opposed to dry.

Keep on yeasting my friends

 

[signpost]

I realize this is an old thread, but I was wondering about this.

I understand the idea that if you wash the yeast from secondary, you are getting the less flocculant yeast. Are there other attributes that might vary depending on which step in the process you take the yeast from? I'm thinking more in terms of flavor-producing attributes.

I have a Kolsch in secondary and I already washed the yeast from the primary. It is the Wyeast 2565 Kolsch yeast. The secondary is clearing steadily and I noticed there seems to be more yeast collecting in the bottom of the carboy than I normally see with other strains. That makes perfect sense, considering this yeast is less flocculant than some of the other english and belgian strains I've used. So, more yeast was still in suspension when I transferred to secondary. That was also obvious, because of how cloudy it was when I transferred it.

So, with all that said, does anybody know the science of yeast well enough to say if we are selecting yeast with particular flavor-producing attributes by taking the yeast from primary vs. secondary?

This might be worth doing some experiments. I do like Kolsch, and there are plenty of warm days coming in the spring and summer that would be a perfect match for this brew. I'm not sure I'll do side by side batches, but I have the ingredients already to do another batch of Kolsch. I just have to decide if I want to try the yeast from secondary, or just stick with the primary.

 

[piteko]

I understand the idea that if you wash the yeast from secondary, you are getting the less flocculant yeast. Are there other attributes that might vary depending on which step in the process you take the yeast from? I'm thinking more in terms of flavor-producing attributes.

I can't duly reply to your question, but I can say that it depends a lot on how many cleanings/brews you want to make. If you stop at the second brew, I don't thing you'll see any remarkable difference (although I firmly beleave that on some specific yeasts this statement is not true).

I would like to take advantage from your thread revival to say that I've done the tests I cited above. Having many little bottles of the yeast second generation in the fridge for months is not a great thing for the yeast. They lose viability and it's hard to make a proper pitch with them without many starters.

By now I'm sticking to this process:
- primary only for 3-4 weeks with a slow cold-crash not to stress to much the yeast;
- take the yeast at bottling time, clean during the week after;
- brew in 1-2 weeks from bottling time using the right amount of yeast slurry;
- I don't reuse it more than 3-4 times; you can go after if you have an extremely good cleaning procedures;
- I usually don't recicle after a very dark or very alcoholic or very high IBU beer;

I took all the infos from some posts here on homebrewtalk and from a transmission on brewstrong.

Cheers!
Piteko

 

[signpost]

Cool. It is good to hear your results from the method you tried. I wonder if nobody has noticed changes in flavor over generations of brews, and so nobody has done any testing on this idea. I guess commercial breweries (big ones and small local ones) use yeast for a fair number of generations without problems, so maybe there aren't any flavor issues that really come up.

 

[piteko]

I wonder if nobody has noticed changes in flavor over generations of brews, and so nobody has done any testing on this idea.

I couldn't answer to the question you made correlated to the primary vs secondary selection, but I can answer to this one. I heard on brewstrong that, in general, the second brew is better than the first and the third is the best. After that it should be perfectly running and virtually there is no stop unless you introduce some sanitization problem or some genetic selection (like selecting only the less flocculant or having fermentation temps really high or low).

Cheers from Italy!
Piteko

 

[COLObrewer]

I couldn't answer to the question you made correlated to the primary vs secondary selection, but I can answer to this one. I heard on brewstrong that, in general, the second brew is better than the first and the third is the best. After that it should be perfectly running and virtually there is no stop unless you introduce some sanitization problem or some genetic selection (like selecting only the less flocculant or having fermentation temps really high or low).

Cheers from Italy!
Piteko

I agree with this, the yeast I have been using since I started this thread has been working fine and I have noticed no drift in flavor profiles. I do however select for styles, i.e. utilize high gravity yeast for high gravity ales, etc. I've had no problems with this either.

I have identified that there is no belgian (namely saison) flavors with the juniper yeast but that is another story and will be added to the appropriate thread when I get the data together.