FG 1.000 and Unfermentable Sugars

[dmtaylor]

What? Really? Sheesh. Are ALL Belgian yeasts diastaticus?

Nope, not all. But many of them are. You just rolled the dice to the same number three times.

 

[SRJHops]

If this has become a pattern where you are getting close to 1.000 for every beer... it might be a permanent "contamination" issue where diastaticus yeasts hide out in soft materials in your fermentation equipment, which can include hoses, stoppers, o-rings, buckets, etc. If this continues for many batches, it might be time to consider replacing all soft materials. I've had to do this a few times over the past 23 years when I started getting something off in my beers including super high attenuation.

Oh, it was a Saison, and I won a contest with it. But that doesn't mean you are aren't right...

 

[dmtaylor]

Oh, it was a Saison, and I won a contest with it. But that doesn't mean you aren't right....

Sure, I'm not saying this is a bad thing. But if you brew some non-Belgian style where you expect an FG of like 1.013 but you still end up with 1.000, then red alert! Then it might be time to dedicate this equipment to only use it for saison-like styles, and nothing else.

 

[VikeMan]

Thanks for the recipe. All 3 of your yeasts are diastaticus. The "worst offender" could have been any of the 3, I'm not sure which one.

1214 and 3522 are diastaticus? That's news to me. And Wyeast doesn't mention it. Not saying your wrong, but what's your source?

 

[dmtaylor]

1214 and 3522 are diastaticus? That's news to me. And Wyeast doesn't mention it. Not saying your wrong, but what's your source?

My reference is me myself. I guess I shouldn't have been so bold to declare this, as I'm not 100% sure yet whether these have the STA1 gene. All I did was take a quick glance at my spreadsheets and noticed these have both given me 85% attenuation in past batches... which would seem to be consistent with a STA1 yeast... but understanding they might actually just be really crazy yeasts but don't actually have the gene. I will actually have to confirm later whether or not these are true STA1 yeast, I've got more data on a different computer. So, hold your breath for a bit, if it matters. Regardless.... these yeasts definitely will give very high attenuation, even if they're not officially "diastaticus". Very high.

 

[SRJHops]

Sure, I'm not saying this is a bad thing. But if you brew some non-Belgian style where you expect an FG of like 1.013 but you still end up with 1.000, then red alert! Then it might be time to dedicate this equipment to only use it for saison-like styles, and nothing else.

Yeah, it totally does have me wondering if I have some kind of "good" infection! I am totally Belgian right now, but maybe I will break down and go back to my old friend the NEIPA, which I brewed (the same recipe) over and over for two years!

 

[dmtaylor]

Turns out I was not quite right. I mean, although the attenuation of these yeasts is all quite high, Wyeast 3522 is in fact NOT diastaticus (STA1 negative).

Meanwhile, Wyeast 1214 is peculiar in that it is a hybrid yeast with S. kudriavzevii as part of its genetic makeup. I'm not sure if it's STA1 positive or not, but this is certainly something unusual. Reference: Brewing yeast family tree (Oct 2019 update) | Suregork Loves Beer
Actually, as part of the Beer2 clade where other diastaticus yeasts are located, it's quite likely to be a diastaticus.

 

[SRJHops]

Turns out I was not quite right. I mean, although the attenuation of these yeasts is all quite high, Wyeast 3522 is in fact NOT diastaticus (STA1 negative).

Meanwhile, Wyeast 1214 is peculiar in that it is a hybrid yeast with S. kudriavzevii as part of its genetic makeup. I'm not sure if it's STA1 positive or not, but this is certainly something unusual. Reference: Brewing yeast family tree (Oct 2019 update) | Suregork Loves Beer
Actually, as part of the Beer2 clade where other diastaticus yeasts are located, it's quite likely to be a diastaticus.

Thanks for the follow up. It's all good. I am now digging into diastaticus yeasts... It seems Saisons have the STA1+ gene -- not sure how common it is in other commercial yeasts. From what I can tell, not very common in yeasts we would purchase. It does seem to be common in wild yeast that can cause contamination.

I did brew a fruit sour in between the two 1.000 beers, and it did not attenuate down to 1.000. BUT it does seem like contamination of my brewing vessels should be of concern. Time to up my cleaning regimen!

 

[Birrofilo]

I made a Saison the other month that was also 1.000, and it had a hint of sweetness. So I think FG is only one measure of the perceived sweetness....

Perceived sweetness depends on many factors. Supposing all simple sugars have been converted, which is normal unless the yeast reached the alcohol toleration limit before clearing its plate, dextrins remain which can be perceived as sweet (or as more or less sweet) by different palates. "Maltiness" in general is perceived as sweet by many, as myself, but not by all, and is mainly dextrins, but this sweetness can be masked by sourness or bitterness, again depending on single persons.

Although everybody will agree that a beverage is clearly sweet or is clearly bitter, when one is in the limelight, e.g. hints of sweetness, hints of bitterness, mixing sweetness and bitterness, sour-bitter, sour-sweet etc. persons can perceive things in different ways.

As said by others, a density of 1, giving the presence of alcohol which has a density less than 1, means that the rest of the beer has a density higher than 1, which indicates residual "sugars" present (dextrins normally) and that might give a "sweet" beer or not depending on sourness, bitterness, and palate.

 

[postalroger]

I recently brewed a saison with Mangrove Jack’s M29 French Saison yeast which went down to 1.000.
On a different note, you mentioned that your Tilt wasn’t as reliable for OG readings as for FG readings. I’ve had the same experience as well, mine is consistently 6-10 points lower than readings with a refractometer or hydrometer for OG.
FG readings usually are very similar.

 

[SRJHops]

I recently brewed a saison with Mangrove Jack’s M29 French Saison yeast which went down to 1.000.
On a different note, you mentioned that your Tilt wasn’t as reliable for OG readings as for FG readings. I’ve had the same experience as well, mine is consistently 6-10 points lower than readings with a refractometer or hydrometer for OG.
FG readings usually are very similar.

Yeah, I do really like having a Tilt, so I can see when fermentation gets going, watch the SG drop, and know when fermentation has ended. But my readings are like yours... For some reason it really struggles with OG, but unless there is gunk on it, it usually gets the FG pretty spot on. But I've learned to always use the hydrometer to double-check...

 

[SRJHops]

Perceived sweetness depends on many factors. Supposing all simple sugars have been converted, which is normal unless the yeast reached the alcohol toleration limit before clearing its plate, dextrins remain which can be perceived as sweet (or as more or less sweet) by different palates. "Maltiness" in general is perceived as sweet by many, as myself, but not by all, and is mainly dextrins, but this sweetness can be masked by sourness or bitterness, again depending on single persons.

Although everybody will agree that a beverage is clearly sweet or is clearly bitter, when one is in the limelight, e.g. hints of sweetness, hints of bitterness, mixing sweetness and bitterness, sour-bitter, sour-sweet etc. persons can perceive things in different ways.

As said by others, a density of 1, giving the presence of alcohol which has a density less than 1, means that the rest of the beer has a density higher than 1, which indicates residual "sugars" present (dextrins normally) and that might give a "sweet" beer or not depending on sourness, bitterness, and palate.

Thanks. Yeah, I have to wonder how much adding 5 or even 10 points really matters. Say I end at 1.000, but wanted to be at 1.010. I could add lactose or non-fermentable sugar, but not even sure it would be perceived.

I recently read a Brulosophy where they were testing this, and if I recall, tasters couldn't discern between beers with a 9 point difference in FG. So you have to wonder how much I would have to raise the FG to really make it noticeable.... I have to believe if I went from 1.000 to 1.020 there would be a difference.

On that note, I think I've crossed another level of beer geekiness, because now I often get out the hydrometer to test the commercial beers I drink. I've been interested in seeing the big SG differences between the alco-pop fruit lambics and the oude ones...

 

[Beermeister32]

Turns out I was not quite right. I mean, although the attenuation of these yeasts is all quite high, Wyeast 3522 is in fact NOT diastaticus (STA1 negative).

Meanwhile, Wyeast 1214 is peculiar in that it is a hybrid yeast with S. kudriavzevii as part of its genetic makeup. I'm not sure if it's STA1 positive or not, but this is certainly something unusual. Reference: Brewing yeast family tree (Oct 2019 update) | Suregork Loves Beer
Actually, as part of the Beer2 clade where other diastaticus yeasts are located, it's quite likely to be a diastaticus.

I was looking at the most recent 2019 yeast family tree. I'm a bit confused, shouldn't there be a yeast number at the point where the black dots are? Would indicate to me anyway that a certain yeast evolved from another one. Or are they put adjacent two each other because the originating yeast (for two adjacent yeasts) are not known, but are close enough to show a kinship to each other? I don't see any that show the derivative yeast strains. Thanks.

 

[VikeMan]

I was looking at the most recent 2019 yeast family tree. I'm a bit confused, shouldn't there be a yeast number at the point where the black dots are? Would indicate to me anyway that a certain yeast evolved from another one. Or are they put adjacent two each other because the originating yeast (for two adjacent yeasts) are not known, but are close enough to show a kinship to each other? I don't see any that show the derivative yeast strains. Thanks.

Those dots represent an (unknown) common ancestor. I don't know exactly how Suregork built his tree, but the lengths of the branches leading back to nodes (with a dot in the case of Suregork's tree) are typically a rough indication of how distant the ancestor was, in this case perhaps based on the accumulation of mutations (which happen at roughly predictable rates).

 

[Beermeister32]

Makes sense.

 

[dmtaylor]

Those dots represent an (unknown) common ancestor. I don't know exactly how Suregork built his tree, but the lengths of the branches leading back to nodes (with a dot in the case of Suregork's tree) are typically a rough indication of how distant the ancestor was, in this case perhaps based on the accumulation of mutations (which happen at roughly predictable rates).

Exactly right.

 

[SRJHops]

I stumbled upon this old thread... That blond that attenuated to 1.000? I entered it in a competition and it won first place!

It's funny looking back on this old thread. Now I pretty much use Saison yeast in all my Belgians. I made a golden strong today and pitched 3522 and 3711.