What yeasts, especially dry are derived from the “Chico” strain?
Depends what you mean by the "Chico" strain! Chico, north of Sacramento, is the hometown of Sierra Nevada, so in yeast terms Chico is generally taken to mean the Sierra Nevada house strain. Ken Grossman originally bought in "Slant #96" (generally assumed to =BRY96) from the Siebel Institute but their yeast is now maintained inhouse and has changed as it adapted to SN's brewery, notably as they acquired bigger fermenters.
It is widely assumed that both BRY96 and BRY97 came from Ballantine's in Newark, New Jersey and represent that company's "lager" and "ale" strains. NRRL Y-7407 is known to come from "Ballentine's" (sic) in NJ and NRRL Y-7408 is also a beer yeast (unlike Y-7406), it's assumed these represent the lager & ale strains, BRY96 and BRY97. Ballantine's had two breweries, only the former Schalk Brothers Brewery on Freeman St made lager (sold as "Ballantine Beer"). User S. cerevisiae has posted pictures (now offline) of the Ballantine's ale brewery showing workers skimming a top-cropping yeast; BRY97 is a top-cropper but not BRY96. BRY97 subsequently found fame as Anchor's yeast, and is also generally equated with WPL051 California V, 1272 American Ale Yeast II and dry BRY-97 from Lallemand (Siebel's parent company).
Looking at the Gallone et al 2016 sequencing paper, IF Suregork's identifications of their strain codes are correct (he's certain that BE044 = WLP001 though) then it seems there are two subfamilies of "US" yeasts. WLP001 and WLP051 form one group, and 1056 is in a separate group (confirmed by Chris White) with WLP090 San Diego and a British yeast, possibly WLP030 Thames Valley. More distant cousins of the two groups are WLP019 California IV, WLP515 Antwerp (allegedly de Koninck) and WLP008 East Coast (allegedly Sam Adams).
Certainly it's known that White Labs WLP001 and Wyeast 1056 brew differently. The Gallone paper also analysed some of the esters and fusels produced at 30C - they found WLP001 notably produced a lot more isobutanol and phenyl ethanol than 1056, and 1056 flocced much better (although ExperimentalBrew would probably disagree). WLP030 was also super-clean in their tests, pretty similar to 1056, whereas WLP051, WLP090 and WLP515 clustered together with a characteristic spike of propyl acetate. I've got WLP030/515 in the fermenters at the moment, I should be bottling them tonight!
So it's not quite as simple as BRY96 = US-05 = WLP001 = Wyeast 1056.
In answer to the original question, if you say that Chico is the Sierra Nevada strain then I'd guess that based on its close relationship to WLP051, WLP001 is a derivative of the original Siebel BRY96 and so is a great^n-uncle of Chico, whereas 1056 was probably harvested from a Sierra Nevada bottle and so is an offspring or first cousin of Chico.
Fermentis US-05 is a dry yeast that fits into the Chico family tree somehow - we should know soon as it's being sequenced by the 1002 Genomes project in Strasbourg. Or rather they're doing one part of US-05; Chris Giles of Surebrew claims to have found 5 different strains within US-05, albeit I think they're just flocculation mutants. But most "US-style" dry yeasts will be derived from Chico, BRY96 or BRY97 somehow.
in your opinion, which one of the three versions available to homebrewers is closest in fermentation characteristics to the in house Sierra Nevada strain? I’ve brewed two Sierra Nevada clones(a pale ale clone and a ruthless rye clone) using us-05 and felt it was incredibly close to the real stuff. What are your thoughts?
However in your opinion, which one of the three versions available to homebrewers is closest in fermentation characteristics to the in house Sierra Nevada strain? I’ve brewed two Sierra Nevada clones(a pale ale clone and a ruthless rye clone) using us-05 and felt it was incredibly close to the real stuff. What are your thoughts?
Anything to do with wit beer yeast is wrong for Blue Moon. Try S-04. It will give you more estersI been brewing a blue moon clone recipe that the original brewer posted a while back and use s-05, I prefer dry yeast
But it just doesn’t taste quite right, thought of using more of a witbier type yeast in lieu of 05,
Old thread but a worthwhile bump. You're collecting the Sierra Nevada yeast right from their bottles? If so which beer, I don't remember there being sediment but it's been a while and I'm sure I haven't had their entire range.
Maybe 2/3 us05 1/3 verdant would get you there as well.I tasted the Sierra Nevada clone from the fermenter using the Sierra Nevada production yeast last night. Can confirm it's pretty fruity. It reminds me a good bit of fruity pebbles. I just don't get that from us-05 or 1056.
Maybe 2/3 us05 1/3 verdant would get you there as well.
Enter your email address to join:
Register today and take advantage of membership benefits.
Enter your email address to join: