Dry yeasts identified - your opinions please!

[Northern_Brewer]

It's

Not to mention the fact that yeast suppliers don't really go around swabbing beer bottles to create their stock. This would rarely work anyway because of filtration and/or pasteurization. They obviously get their stock from other suppliers/yeast banks or complacent breweries.

it's not obvious at all. There's cases where this has happened - Lallemand own Seibel, where the original BRY97 was deposited, but most of the homebrew liquid strains have their origins in US homebrewers harvesting yeast from whatever bottles they could, and then passing them around the community, mutating away, until they ended up at a commercial company. Which is why the attributions can be a bit dodgy, and why WL and Wyeast versions of the same yeast can show significant genetic variation - WLP001 and 1056 are a classic example.

Pasteurisation is far from universal - many British breweries like to have one bottle-conditioned beer for Camra-political reasons, and of course you can find most British ale yeasts in cask dregs from a pub.

Andy - it's all internet hearsay, I don't have a reliable source but supposedly the story goes that for some reason (building work?) Lallemand outsourced some production to Munton for a while and Munton kept some Notty master culture after the deal had expired. Not sure how true that is though.

 

[frankvw]

With modern techniques such as single-cell cultures and modern quality assurance processes, which today mean actual genetic testing, the chances of something like this happening are inifitesimally small.

That's assuming that:

1. All mutations will take place in the yeast lab;
2. All those mutations will be considered undesirable and will therefore be culled before they can get out of the petri dish.

In practice that is not always true. Nor does it mean that these "domesticated" yeasts have lost their ability to mutate.

Anyway, we're drifting off topic here. You guys were supposed to rip apart my "name that yeast" spreadsheet and tell me where I've blundered.

 

[frankvw]

OK, so no scientific source as I thought.

Well, feel free to provide one! I welcome being corrected by reliable references.

 

[Vale71]

Well, feel free to provide one! I welcome being corrected by reliable references.

I doubt anybody has ever written a peer reviewed paper proving that WL and WY yeasts were not taken from monastic breweries and then mutated as that would obviously be quite impossible to prove. As always, the onus is on the side making the statement to prove its validity and not the other way around 'cause that is how science works. Saying "It's well known" or citing a book that provides no reliable or identifiable sources a proof does not constitute...

 

[dmtaylor]

On my own spreadsheet, my sources are scientific papers, and... experiences of the interwebs and my own personal experiences. We can all contribute.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

The Lallemand tech was obviously and justifiably limited in what he could say, but my take away from it (clearly not stated by Lallemand) is that if others that are POF+ (which I believe restricts "others" to the realm of liquid yeasts) can be inferred to be "Chimay" yeasts, then so can Lallemand Abbaye.

To me (meaning, in my opinion) the Fermentis version which formerly also went by the name Abbaye is disqualified by virtue of (if accurate) being POF-.

 

[frankvw]

I doubt anybody has ever written a peer reviewed paper proving that WL and WY yeasts were not taken from monastic breweries and then mutated as that would obviously be quite impossible to prove. As always, the onus is on the side making the statement to prove its validity and not the other way around 'cause that is how science works. Saying "It's well known" or citing a book that provides no reliable or identifiable sources a proof does not constitute...

In other words, you don't have any scientific sources either?

 

[Vale71]

Sources for what? Papers that disprove an unproven assertion? Do you not realize how absurd that is?

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

What set me off was the fact that I have learned that Brewcraft definitely does not have their own yeast labs, and speaking with someone at Fermentis who let drop (beer is a wonderful thing!) that there is a facility in the UK that repacks Fermentis and Lallemand yeasts (and presumably others) for MJ and other brands.

...

So at this point I would like your feedback! Do you agree or disagree with the above identifications of repacked / rebranded dry yeasts, and why?

At this point (comment 68 or 69), this topic has had some interesting liquid yeast discussions.

As for feedback, I currently don't see me using your spreadsheet. It may be an interesting point in time consolidation of attributes of brands of dry yeast. Generally, I will get current information from the vendors web site for the specific strains I use.

As for the identification of repacked / rebranded dry yeasts: I would like to see evidence for this claim that goes beyond "I heard someone say".

If I were to accept that the claim is true, the next question would be: why does this matter to me when I use yeast from a company that repackages yeast? If the yeast delivers the result I'm looking for, why does it matter who put it in a package?

 

[dmtaylor]

I think M47 is T-58 and M41 is Abbaye. MJ's product blurb strongly suggests M47 less phenolic than M41 which fits the data from Lallemand and Fermentis. But if you have a good argument for them being the other way around, I'm open to suggestions!

The Belgian strain stuff was driving me up the wall with confusion... so I went ahead and spent several hours trying to sort it all out, did a few more Google searches, etc. Here's what I've come up with -- and please, recognize that these are only best-stabs based on my evaluation of every detail to try to make the puzzle pieces fit together even though maybe they don't necessarily -- i.e., these "equivalents" are likely not totally equivalent, but should come very close, for most intents & purposes. Key thing: I had to dissociate and reassociate M31 Tripel Ale and WB-06 to make everything work in concert.

Fermentis T-58 seems to have NO equivalent from what I can tell, based on lowest attenuation
Fermentis WB-06 = M47 Abbey = WLP570 = 1388 (I know! I never saw this coming, but it might fit!?)
Fermentis BE-134 = M41 Belgian = WLP590
Fermentis BE-256 (used to be their "Abbaye") = maybe M31 Tripel?
Lallemand Abbaye = WLP500 = 1214 = "Chimay" = maybe M31 Tripel? (maybe you guys can help me figure where M31 fits best)
Lallemand Belle Saison = M29 French Saison

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it, for now anyway. Feel free to prove me wrong on any or all of the above via side-by-side experimentation results. Thanks. And I updated my link:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nwVema5Y8kuGbTR_vlz6gzU-KCngFYWjrAJO44xjwfA/edit?usp=sharing

 

[ebbelwoi]

Just came across this: https://www.saltcitybrewsupply.com/media/YeastComparison3.pdf

Some of the dry yeast comparisons seem pretty far off, like WB-06 being comparable to WLP300/WY3068. When I see something like that, I don't know how reliable the rest of it is.

 

[dmtaylor]

Just came across this: https://www.saltcitybrewsupply.com/media/YeastComparison3.pdf

Some of the dry yeast comparisons seem pretty far off, like WB-06 being comparable to WLP300/WY3068. When I see something like that, I don't know how reliable the rest of it is.

Not too terrible for the most part. Slightly outdated. But will get the beer into the right ballpark.

 

[frankvw]

Sources for what? Papers that disprove an unproven assertion? Do you not realize how absurd that is?

That is not the point I'm trying to make. I started this thread in order to further the work on identifying the dry yeasts that are being sold under different brand names. I did so (as I clearly stated) by lining up the product data as published by the suppliers, and offered it here for discussion in order to improve on my assessments. Trying to discredit that for lack of scientific sources without providing better data is not constructive in that context.

So I suggest we drop this particular line of discussion and focus on the job at hand which, as I see it, is identifying dried yeast strains. I'm still unsure about what's in the packets of M21, M54 and M84, and it looks like the Belgian strains could do with a back-to-back test brew for comparison but that's going to have to wait until I have time because I've got a lot of work going on right now.

So. Suggestions about the identities above yeasts are welcome!

 

[Vale71]

Trying to discredit that for lack of scientific sources without providing better data is not constructive in that context.

Sorry, I currently lack the capabilities to perform genome sequencing so I cannot provide better data and I will refrain from contributing more uneducated guesses to the rather rich collections already available on the Internet. I still reserve the right to express my opinion on other contributions though, I'm sorry if that's not constructive enough for you.

 

[thehaze]

WB-06 is not Weihenstephan. WB-06 ( http://beer.suregork.com/ ) is closer to the Duvel yeast family, which makes it more belgiany than anything. The dry version of Weihenstephan Hefe is Danstar Munich Classic ( there are threads on german forums that confirm it ) and Weihenstephan Lager is W-34/70. I've read that T-58 might be used by De Struise - maybe, but I doubt it. T-58 produces amazingly fruity blow'off aromas during fermentation, but it doesn't carry to the finished product. It's a weird yeast, but it has always worked for me and I will use it again.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

After I get over my urge to make an ESB with WLP041, I may try to make one with Lallemand New England Ale Yeast. The flavor wheel seems to hit all of the right buttons.

 

[frankvw]

The Belgian strain stuff was driving me up the wall with confusion... so I went ahead and spent several hours trying to sort it all out, did a few more Google searches, etc. Here's what I've come up with -- and please, recognize that these are only best-stabs based on my evaluation of every detail to try to make the puzzle pieces fit together even though maybe they don't necessarily -- i.e., these "equivalents" are likely not totally equivalent, but should come very close, for most intents & purposes. Key thing: I had to dissociate and reassociate M31 Tripel Ale and WB-06 to make everything work in concert.

Duly noted, sir, and thank you! This is the sort of feedback I was hoping for here.

Now then, to business. Limiting the following to dried strains:

Fermentis T-58 seems to have NO equivalent from what I can tell, based on lowest attenuation

Fermentis specifies T-58 as having an AA of 70%. Brewcraft specifies M47 at 73-77%. That's the closest I can get to T-58.

Fermentis WB-06 = M47 Abbey = WLP570 = 1388 (I know! I never saw this coming, but it might fit!?)

I'm not sure I agree with you there. M-47 supposedly has an AA of 73-77% and WB-06 is specified at 86%. I'd have assumed this could have been BE-256 except M-47's attenuation and alcohol tolerance are nowhere neat that of BE-256 so that's not a good match, either. The blurb for M-47 doesn't specifically mention distinct phenols, but then T-58 is in practice not very phenolic, either

Fermentis BE-134 = M41 Belgian = WLP590

I see where you're going and I would agree with you if it weren't for the fact that BE-134 has a specified alcohol tolerance of 9% and M-41 is specified at 12%. That's why I believe BE-134 is M-31 (specified at 10% which is close enough to 9% to be possible) which means that, by elimination, M-41 almost has to be Lallemand Abbaye...

Fermentis BE-256 (used to be their "Abbaye") = maybe M31 Tripel?

I believe M-31 is POF+. I've tasted beers brewed with it that had clearly discernible Belgian spicy phenols which BE-256 completely lacks. M-31 is also not such a banana bomb as BE-256 is.

Lallemand Abbaye = WLP500 = 1214 = "Chimay" = maybe M31 Tripel? (maybe you guys can help me figure where M31 fits best)

Based on the alcohol tolerance, attenuation, high fruit and low (but present i.e. POF+) phenolics specified in the MJ blurb I believe BE-134 would be the closest match...

Lallemand Belle Saison = M29 French Saison

Agreed!

Thank you for this! It's food for thought at the very least and illustrates the challenge of matching yeasts by comparing the specs. i can see myself doing about 8 simultaneous split batch fermentations sometime later this year simply to compare the Belgian strains...

 

[Northern_Brewer]

If I were to accept that the claim is true, the next question would be: why does this matter to me when I use yeast from a company that repackages yeast? If the yeast delivers the result I'm looking for, why does it matter who put it in a package?

It's useful for people who can't readily get certain brands of yeast, or to save money by using cheaper ones - Wilko yeast is a third of the price of Notty, and there's a Wilko on almost every British high street, so it's a great option for emergencies.

Talking of Notty, supposedly it, Windsor and Lallemand ESB all came from the same multistrain, which explains why Windsor and ESB are so closely related.

I know the internet is convinced S-04 is a Whitbread strain but sequencing has shown it's most closely related to 006 Bedford and 013.

M54 won't be Lallemand Koln, the latter is too new. I wonder if it's not S-189, the temperature tolerance and flocculation would fit.

Bulldog clearly follow Mangrove Jack closely, presumably they're packed at the same factory - things like pack size are a good clue. Crossmyloof used to follow MJ but supposedly they're now using more yeast from a German supplier.

Oh, and EDME is capitalised, it stands for the English Diastatic Malt Extract Company.
https://www.edme.com/about/history/

 

[Miraculix]

It's useful for people who can't readily get certain brands of yeast, or to save money by using cheaper ones - Wilko yeast is a third of the price of Notty, and there's a Wilko on almost every British high street, so it's a great option for emergencies.

Talking of Notty, supposedly it, Windsor and Lallemand ESB all came from the same multistrain, which explains why Windsor and ESB are so closely related.

I know the internet is convinced S-04 is a Whitbread strain but sequencing has shown it's most closely related to 006 Bedford and 013.

M54 won't be Lallemand Koln, the latter is too new. I wonder if it's not S-189, the temperature tolerance and flocculation would fit.

Bulldog clearly follow Mangrove Jack closely, presumably they're packed at the same factory - things like pack size are a good clue. Crossmyloof used to follow MJ but supposedly they're now using more yeast from a German supplier.

Oh, and EDME is capitalised, it stands for the English Diastatic Malt Extract Company.
https://www.edme.com/about/history/

Cml recently launched new yeasts, one sold as "northern ale" I wonder what this one is. A koelsch strain maybe?

 

[dmtaylor]

M54 won't be Lallemand Koln, the latter is too new. I wonder if it's not S-189, the temperature tolerance and flocculation would fit.

Oh, and EDME is capitalised, it stands for the English Diastatic Malt Extract Company.
https://www.edme.com/about/history/

I agree that M54 can't be Koln. I postulate M54 = Superior Dry Lager = Mauribrew 497

Thanks for that info about EDME. I'll keep it acronymized from now on!

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Cml recently launched new yeasts, one sold as "northern ale" I wonder what this one is. A koelsch strain maybe?

Immediate reaction would be that someone's revived the old Danstar Manchester, but perhaps they've got their hands on the upcoming dry 1318 derivative that Lallemand have been working on.

 

[Miraculix]

Immediate reaction would be that someone's revived the old Danstar Manchester, but perhaps they've got their hands on the upcoming dry 1318 derivative that Lallemand have been working on.

https://www.thehomebrewforum.co.uk/threads/new-crossmyloof-haze-yeast.81978/

Here early tests showed really high attenuation and a bit of phenolic spice from norsk. They are discussing if this is actually more of a Belgian strain, maybe even diastetic? Has also a wide temperature range, just like a lot of Belgians have as well.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Oh,you mean this one?

"HøG-NORSK. Northern European Ale Yeast.

Suitable to brew low ester ales with a clean palate
Attenuation: 75-80%"

I'd suggest the fact it has Norsk in the name means it's a kveik, which also explains the temperature tolerance. One guy there talks about a touch of "phenol/booziness", others say it's clean, which sounds like a slightly stressed yeast more than Belgianness.

 

[skw]

Not to mention the fact that yeast suppliers don't really go around swabbing beer bottles to create their stock. This would rarely work anyway because of filtration and/or pasteurization. They obviously get their stock from other suppliers/yeast banks or complacent breweries.

How many breweries are actually pasteurizing? I'm imagining the thermal stress would degrade the beer. I've successfully grown yeast from crystal clear bottled commercial beer by putting a drop on malt agar. My guess would be most breweries take reasonable measures to produce visually clear beer, but not to the point where they'd sterile filter it.

 

[skw]

For a variety of reasons (hubris, a few beers and more curiosity than is good for me) I have taken it upon myself to try and work out what's really in those packets of Mangrove Jack's, Muntons, Morgans and other dry yeasts. What set me off was the fact that I have learned that Brewcraft definitely does not have their own yeast labs, and speaking with someone at Fermentis who let drop (beer is a wonderful thing!) that there is a facility in the UK that repacks Fermentis and Lallemand yeasts (and presumably others) for MJ and other brands

How do we know that Fermentis or Lallemand don't produce custom dried strains for third parties which they don't sell under their own label?

 

[Vale71]

If done right pasteurization actually will give you a more stable product that might reach the customer in a better shape than without it.
All commercial breweries sterile filter their beer with the exception of some traditional beer styles (Hefeweizen) and some craft breweries but definitely not all of them.

 

[Miraculix]

Oh,you mean this one?

"HøG-NORSK. Northern European Ale Yeast.

Suitable to brew low ester ales with a clean palate
Attenuation: 75-80%"

I'd suggest the fact it has Norsk in the name means it's a kveik, which also explains the temperature tolerance. One guy there talks about a touch of "phenol/booziness", others say it's clean, which sounds like a slightly stressed yeast more than Belgianness.

I thought the same but it seems to be over attenuative for kveik. Also the spice seems not to fit with kveik, both soun more like a saison/Belgian something, which would also match the temperature recommendations. But who knows.... Last point speaking against kveik, I haven't heard of any dry yeast company selling kveik and cml does not produce yeast on its own.

 

[frankvw]

Sorry to respond so late; work has kept me away from the more important things in life.

I know the internet is convinced S-04 is a Whitbread strain but sequencing has shown it's most closely related to 006 Bedford and 013.

Noted! I've got Suregork's yeast family tree in front of me right now.

M54 won't be Lallemand Koln, the latter is too new.

Thank you for spotting that. I didn't know when Köln entered the market.

I wonder if it's not S-189, the temperature tolerance and flocculation would fit.

Looking at the data sheet for S-189, I see a recommended fermentation temperature range of 12-15°C (53.6-59°F) while M54 is specified at 18 - 20°C (64 - 68°F). However, the latter is recommended for "California Common and lagers fermented at ambient (ale) temperatures." So I have no idea how to line that up. In fact, on that basis it could be S-23 or W-34/70 as well. Any ideas on the latter?

Bulldog clearly follow Mangrove Jack closely, presumably they're packed at the same factory - things like pack size are a good clue.

According to what I was told while speaking informally with a Fermentis employee over a few beers, this is correct. The facility is located in the UK and my personal opinion is that this is most likely SPL Ltd (formerly known as Sachetpacket Ltd. and now owned by iMake in NZ, i.e. Brewcraft i.e. Mangrove Jack's).

Crossmyloof used to follow MJ but supposedly they're now using more yeast from a German supplier.

Not familar with that one so I'll take your word for it.

Oh, and EDME is capitalised, it stands for the English Diastatic Malt Extract Company.https://www.edme.com/about/history/

Corrected.

Thank you!!!

 

[frankvw]

Cml recently launched new yeasts, one sold as "northern ale" I wonder what this one is. A koelsch strain maybe?

Good question. Off-hand my guess is that they just "break bulk" from 500 gram Fermentis and Lallemand bricks and relable them. As is the case with quite a few homebrew shops out there. As a guess, their Northern Ale might be Lallemand Köln.

 

[frankvw]

I agree that M54 can't be Koln. I postulate M54 = Superior Dry Lager = Mauribrew 497

Hmm... Interesting thought! Based on product data it's the best match! However, all MJ's other yeasts are Fermentis or Lallemand, so this would be an "odd one out". But yes, I see where you're going, and you make a very good point.