Bottle conditioning with maltodextrin

[mccann51]

Hi, all. I have some maltodextrin hanging around, and I'm wondering if I can use it for bottle conditioning. I'd like to use it for bottle conditioning of a Brett saison. Is this possible, or do I need Pedio in there for it to ferment the maltodextrin? If it is possible, is 4oz enough for a 2.5 gallon batch? Thanks.

 

[smokinghole]

I'll let you know in about 4 months. I just bottled up a saison with JP microbes from a bottle of La Roja. I stuck a touch of regular corn sugar in there and then some maltodextrin for the microbes to munch. I put 4oz in the half batch I bottled in corked bottles. I'll open my first at the 5/6 month mark. I hope to let a bunch go past a year to see how they change.

 

[Oldsock]

What are you hoping to accomplish? I'd worry that it would be difficult to predict the carbonation level. If you want more sour/funk I would add the malto-dextrin wait for the gravity to stabilize, then prime/bottle as usual.

 

[smokinghole]

I'm just hoping to accomplish an experiment of sorts. I know what the gravity was going in and I'll see what it is after the MD is consumed in the bottle. I just want to see if the same procedure is followed, if you can get predictable results by dosing in bottles. I don't like keeping carboys tied up for six months to a year waiting for gravity to stabilize. I thought that if I can do this and get desirable results why not because it take no more time than just squirting some microbes in a bottle.

 

[mccann51]

What are you hoping to accomplish? I'd worry that it would be difficult to predict the carbonation level. If you want more sour/funk I would add the malto-dextrin wait for the gravity to stabilize, then prime/bottle as usual.

Carbonation and funk, predominantly the former, though. Why would this be any different from adding regular sugar? Will the Brett be able to eat it by itself?

 

[Oldsock]

Carbonation and funk, predominantly the former, though. Why would this be any different from adding regular sugar? Will the Brett be able to eat it by itself?

Brett should be able to eat it, but it may take months. Some reports (IIRC Ithaca Brewing interview) are that Brett makes 50% of the CO2 of a standard Saccharomyces fermentation when doing these more complex fermentations.

Without waiting for the beer to stabilize it is hard to tell just how low it will go and just how much carbonation will be produced. The breweries who routinely bottle their beer with the Brett still working often end up with over-carbonation issues down the road (see the early days of Russian River and Jolly Pumpkin).

Not saying it won't work, just saying it is more risky.

 

[mccann51]

Brett should be able to eat it, but it may take months. Some reports (IIRC Ithaca Brewing interview) are that Brett makes 50% of the CO2 of a standard Saccharomyces fermentation when doing these more complex fermentations.

Without waiting for the beer to stabilize it is hard to tell just how low it will go and just how much carbonation will be produced. The breweries who routinely bottle their beer with the Brett still working often end up with over-carbonation issues down the road (see the early days of Russian River and Jolly Pumpkin).

Not saying it won't work, just saying it is more risky.

Okay, thank you for the warning. I'll use honey instead of the maltodextrin to prime.

 

[mccann51]

Okay, just reread your post. To clarify, Brett are producing 50% more CO2 when fermenting more complex sugars than when they're fermenting simple-Sacch-fermentables, right? Or are you saying anything with Brett conditioning (without chemical stabilization) is prone to this issue?

Sorry to be such a worry-wort (pun intended in retrospect), more looking to get a full understanding of what's going on than anything else. Thanks.

 

[Oldsock]

Brett makes 50% less CO2 than Sacch gram for gram of fermentables, apparently. I've never had much of an issue just using standard priming calculators for sour beers (although barrel aged beers can be tricky because their dissolved CO2 can be low). Good insurance is to add some yeast at bottling, that way you get carbonation quickly and the character does not change as much.

I have similar complaints about honey, it is hard to know exactly how much fermentable sugar is in an agricultural product.

 

[mccann51]

Against OldSock's good advice, I went ahead and used honey as the priming sugar (curiosity and convenience are two powerful forces, haha!). I racked the two and a half gallons onto 0.25lbs of buckwheat honey and then bottled. The saison is definitely overcarbed - not volcano-overcarbed, but still overflowing - and I had to recap some of the bottles as the caps were distended.

 

[smokinghole]

I actually just popped one of my bottles of saison last night. The maltodextrine seems to have certainly provided carbonation. The carbonation of the saison is certainly high but it really is about what I wanted. I could detect a very slight funkiness after just 1.5 months in the bottle. I hope the beer keeps developing. I couldn't wait 5/6 months like I had planned. Though I now know that it worked!

 

[mccann51]

I've got a sour stout that is kind of a ****-show at this point - threw a lot of different stuff at it, did not keep it simple at all, and now it's TOO complex, ie kind of a muddy experience (not muddy taste) - and I may try it. I recognize the risk of priming it with the maltodextrin, but at this point am kind of just thinking, **** it, might as well go full on at this point, see what happens.