Isolated Yeast (Tree House): How to Identify and Characterize?

CornyKegs 728
Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Northern_Brewer said:
Given that they refer to "Some internet data shows that mix-yeast traces were found in some commercial NEIPA. " I'm guessing that some readers of this thread have!!!

Worth noting that S-33 is a close relative of Windsor and Muntons, and a fairly close cousin of T-58 which does seem to be quite biotransform-y.
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly. The first question that came to my mind was. Does the dna fingerprint of s-33 look like t58.
 
Similar but not the same - it was discussed quite a bit in the early pages of this thread eg here.

As an aside @isomerization the gel pic links on tinypic are dead - could you repost them as uploads?
 
This is why I mentioned S33 a few weeks back. I know s23 was sequenced, but I don't recall seeing s33. My next attempt will have s04, s33, wb06.

Has anyone brewed a batch s33 alone? I'm curious what its ester profile would be like. According to fermentis its very fruity, but I'd be worried about phenolic/spicy characteristics coming from it.
 
Why would you worry about phenolics? It's very similar to Windsor, it's non-phenolic.
 
brewpharm Hill said:
This is why I mentioned S33 a few weeks back. I know s23 was sequenced, but I don't recall seeing s33. My next attempt will have s04, s33, wb06.

Has anyone brewed a batch s33 alone? I'm curious what its ester profile would be like. According to fermentis its very fruity, but I'd be worried about phenolic/spicy characteristics coming from it.
Click to expand...

I’m curious if anyone brewed with s33 as well
 
But the phenolics come from a specific pair of genes that are well characterised and that are not expressed in S-33/Windsor/Muntons but are present in T-58.
 
Could you point me in the direction of a genetic test highlighting the lack of said genes in S-33? Also do you have any specific references for the similarities between S-33/Windsor/Muntons? Not doubting as such, just wary of misinformation. S-04 for example has now been shown via PCR to not be a Whitbread strain after all and 1469 is diastatic and is the basis for some Belgian house strains!

It would be really great if someone who had access to qPCR and Treehouse beers would pick up the batton and put this to bed once and for all!
 
Where did you read that 1469 was diastaticus? Wyeast would include that on their site as they do for all yeasts that have the STA1 gene. Did you mean something else?

You can see from the Suregork study that S-33 is grouped with London ESB, Muntons, and Windsor. All POF- yeasts. I believe Fermentis would also state that it’s POF+ on their data sheets if it was.
 
The S-33 that was sequenced in the recent Langdon et al. study at least has homozygous nonsense mutations in both PAD1 and FDC1. In simpler terms, this means that all copies of the two genes required for the formation of phenolic off-flavours have mutations in them that makes them non-functional. So at least based on the genotype, S-33 should not produce any phenolics (provided there hasn't been any mixup during sequencing).
 
WLP037 is STA+

If WY1469 is the same yeast then it will be too.

It appears to be present but not ‘triggered’ or ‘active’, but I know that it is merely dormant and can hyper attenuate and get ‘Belgiany’.

On a similar theme it has been noted that Conan can suddenly suddenly get very Belgiany, seemingly out of nowhere. Which makes me wonder if it too has a dormant STA1 gene...and perhaps Conan is related to this Yorkshire yeast somehow.
 
Such info isn’t acknowledged by the ‘big 2’ as yet, but I can assure you it is the case.
 
StinkyBeer said:
WLP037 is STA+

If WY1469 is the same yeast then it will be too.

It appears to be present but not ‘triggered’ or ‘active’, but I know that it is merely dormant and can hyper attenuate and get ‘Belgiany’.

On a similar theme it has been noted that Conan can suddenly suddenly get very Belgiany, seemingly out of nowhere. Which makes me wonder if it too has a dormant STA1 gene...and perhaps Conan is related to this Yorkshire yeast somehow.
Click to expand...

They’re not even close genetically.

http://beer.suregork.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Brewing_yeast_tree_Oct_2019.pdf

Wlp037 can be found with all the other POF + diastaticus yeasts... 1469 couldn’t be further away.

Did you have something tested that over attenuated and expressed phenols? Sure it wasn’t an infected pitch?
 
TBryerton said:
Can you elaborate on that a little more? Have you tried those with good results?
Click to expand...

Just did a primary ferment with s-33 and when I went to dry hop on day 4 there were very little signs of activity. When I checked the gravity, it was close to complete, so I pitched wb-06 with dry hops for good measure. I had a side fermentation with k-97 going and added more dry hops in that then added it back to the primary. The results were close to an eq or monkish NEIPA for me. The picture doesn’t do it justice
IMG_5446.JPG
 
echoALEia said:
Just did a primary ferment with s-33 and when I went to dry hop on day 4 there were very little signs of activity. When I checked the gravity, it was close to complete, so I pitched wb-06 with dry hops for good measure. I had a side fermentation with k-97 going and added more dry hops in that then added it back to the primary. The results were close to an eq or monkish NEIPA for me. The picture doesn’t do it justice View attachment 665278
Click to expand...
Very cool! What kind of esters did you get? Anything like TH? What about the batches you did in the past with the separate t58 and wb06 batch added to primary so4? Any luck with those?
 
Last edited:
NJGeorge said:
Very cool! What kind of esters did you get? Anything like TH? What about the batches you did in the past with the separate t58 and wb06 batch added to primary so4? Any luck with those?
Click to expand...

Sorry for the late reply! I definitely got some nice fruity esters from it, reminded me a little of Perfect Storm by treehouse even though I know they aren’t the same hops. The funny thing is when I was dropping some hops out of the bottom of my fermenter on this batch, I had a tiny explosion where the tubing busted open and some hop debris got all over (luckily it wasn’t too bad). The aroma reminded me of the way the way the charlton treehouse smells as soon as you walk in. After my post months ago where I used the original 3 yeasts, I haven’t done any batches with them since, but I’ve been using the same process. I think centrifuges, hop recirculating, or rousing with CO2 is key to this style because I’ve had the flavor and aroma dead on, but when I let everything sit and condition, that trademark treehouse style fades after I dry hop initially.
 
JohnConnor said:
Did some posts get deleted? I could have sworn @echoALEia detailed more about his process. Very interested.
Click to expand...

Weird, I’ll have to go back and look. Anything I posted in the past couple of days hasn’t been erased but I haven’t checked back to see if my original post where I detailed my process got erased. I’ll check it out. If it did I’m more than happy to share again what I did.
 
echoALEia said:
Sorry for the late reply! I definitely got some nice fruity esters from it, reminded me a little of Perfect Storm by treehouse even though I know they aren’t the same hops. The funny thing is when I was dropping some hops out of the bottom of my fermenter on this batch, I had a tiny explosion where the tubing busted open and some hop debris got all over (luckily it wasn’t too bad). The aroma reminded me of the way the way the charlton treehouse smells as soon as you walk in. After my post months ago where I used the original 3 yeasts, I haven’t done any batches with them since, but I’ve been using the same process. I think centrifuges, hop recirculating, or rousing with CO2 is key to this style because I’ve had the flavor and aroma dead on, but when I let everything sit and condition, that trademark treehouse style fades after I dry hop initially.
Click to expand...
Good stuff! Did you rehydrate the wb when added with the dry hop? Also, which hops did you use and grist?
 
echoALEia said:
Just did a primary ferment with s-33 and when I went to dry hop on day 4 there were very little signs of activity. When I checked the gravity, it was close to complete, so I pitched wb-06 with dry hops for good measure. I had a side fermentation with k-97 going and added more dry hops in that then added it back to the primary. The results were close to an eq or monkish NEIPA for me. The picture doesn’t do it justice
Click to expand...
To make sure I understand what you're saying.

You fermented with S-33 and dry hopped with a few points left in fermentation, adding WB-06 with the hops. Then you blended that with a different batch fermenting with K-97? (Blended back when? During dry hopping or at packaging when both were done?)
 
VirginiaHops1 said:
To make sure I understand what you're saying.

You fermented with S-33 and dry hopped with a few points left in fermentation, adding WB-06 with the hops. Then you blended that with a different batch fermenting with K-97? (Blended back when? During dry hopping or at packaging when both were done?)
Click to expand...

Yes! Sorry, I wrote that last post in a rush yesterday
 
NJGeorge said:
Good stuff! Did you rehydrate the wb when added with the dry hop? Also, which hops did you use and grist?
Click to expand...

Nope! Just pitched it dry.

The grist was rahr 2 row 30%, TF malted oats 38%, carafoam 25%, and Weyermann Munich II 7%. Hops Strata/Citra/I7 at a 2/1/0.5 ratio in the whirlpool and kettle. Columbus for bittering at 15 minutes. Just took a sample again and it’s amazing. Very reminiscent of Monkish
 
echoALEia said:
Yes! Sorry, I wrote that last post in a rush yesterday
Click to expand...
Yes, you blended during dry hopping when you also added the WB-06, or you let them both finish and then blended?

K-97 has been on my list to try as I work my way through various yeasts trying to determine my favorite for this style, although I haven't gotten to it yet. I've heard it's Pinthouse Pizza's house yeast. I'm wondering what it brings to the table here though, as I thought it was a very clean tasting yeast. That's supposedly why PP says they like it, doesn't get in the way of the hops. Unless it's purpose is just to dilute the S-33/WB-06 esters so they're not overpowering.

S-33 wasn't on my radar but I'll give that a look.
 
Last edited:
VirginiaHops1 said:
Yes, you blended during dry hopping when you also added the WB-06, or you let them both finish and then blended?

K-97 has been on my list to try as I work my way through various yeasts trying to determine my favorite for this style, although I haven't gotten to it yet. I've heard it's Pinthouse Pizza's house yeast. I'm wondering what it brings to the table here though, as I thought it was a very clean tasting yeast. That's supposedly why PP says they like it, doesn't get in the way of the hops. Unless it's purpose is just to dilute the S-33/WB-06 esters so they're not overpowering.

S-33 wasn't on my radar but I'll give that a look.
Click to expand...

I let the main batch finish then blended when the blend was close to finished - around day 7. I saved part of the wort in my fridge on brew day and pitched k-97 in the blend on day 2 of the main fermentation.

The aroma from the k-97 was pretty clean right before I added the dry hops, so I would definitely agree with you there if you want a hazy yeast that stays out of the way of the hops.
 
echoALEia said:
I let the main batch finish then blended when the blend was close to finished - around day 7. I saved part of the wort in my fridge on brew day and pitched k-97 in the blend on day 2 of the main fermentation.

The aroma from the k-97 was pretty clean right before I added the dry hops, so I would definitely agree with you there if you want a hazy yeast that stays out of the way of the hops.
Click to expand...

Do you mind sharing how many grams you pitched of each yeast, your starting OG and how many gallons you saved for the k-97. I am just curious what pitching rate you used and how much the yeast was stressed. Also what temps did you fermented at? This sounds like a nice combination to try.
 
Alex Hubert said:
Do you mind sharing how many grams you pitched of each yeast, your starting OG and how many gallons you saved for the k-97. I am just curious what pitching rate you used and how much the yeast was stressed. Also what temps did you fermented at? This sounds like a nice combination to try.
Click to expand...

Sure! I work for a very small brewery, so I brew 35 gallon batches at a time(which comes to about 1bbl after losses). My OG was 1.073 for this particular batch. I pitched 108 grams of S-33 - recommended by BeerSmith. I cooled down the wort to 64F, then set my temp controller for 66F. I pitched 11g of WB-06 at dry hop and shut the controller off. In the side fermentation, I pitched 11g of K-97 in about 4.5 gallon of wort - I’m sure I was over pitching there and I just let it take off from 64F - no temperature control.

As I write this, it’s still conditioning. There’s a bit of hop burn still but the aroma is amazing. Very reminiscent of the juicy fruit bubble gum that treehouse gets - not dead on, but fairly close and original in it’s own right. Pretty sure it’s a combination of the Strata hops and the new yeast combinations. I find when I use my homemade hop cannon to dry hop (that’s where the K-97 ferment goes in this batch) that ‘s when the beer tastes and smells almost exactly like treehouse, however, the flavor doesn’t stay. Here is the recipe. The dry hop numbers are split in half between the primary and secondary fermentation. My FG finished at 1.016 FYI

IMG_5727.JPG
IMG_5728.JPG
 
Thanks for the info I will definitely be trying this on my next ipa. I had been wondering if TH uses a base yeast that leave a lot a residual sugar then use wb06 later so it can't take over. This make sense and s33 definitely leave a lot of sugar behind.
echoALEia said:
Sure! I work for a very small brewery, so I brew 35 gallon batches at a time(which comes to about 1bbl after losses). My OG was 1.073 for this particular batch. I pitched 108 grams of S-33 - recommended by BeerSmith. I cooled down the wort to 64F, then set my temp controller for 66F. I pitched 11g of WB-06 at dry hop and shut the controller off. In the side fermentation, I pitched 11g of K-97 in about 4.5 gallon of wort - I’m sure I was over pitching there and I just let it take off from 64F - no temperature control.

As I write this, it’s still conditioning. There’s a bit of hop burn still but the aroma is amazing. Very reminiscent of the juicy fruit bubble gum that treehouse gets - not dead on, but fairly close and original in it’s own right. Pretty sure it’s a combination of the Strata hops and the new yeast combinations. I find when I use my homemade hop cannon to dry hop (that’s where the K-97 ferment goes in this batch) that ‘s when the beer tastes and smells almost exactly like treehouse, however, the flavor doesn’t stay. Here is the recipe. The dry hop numbers are split in half between the primary and secondary fermentation. My FG finished at 1.016 FYI

View attachment 666524View attachment 666525
Click to expand...
 
Tried going back in the thread, hard to find any single successful recipes or summaries. Has anyone had any success using the yeast blends?
 
Last edited:
I still find it incredibly hard to believe that there is any diastaticus yeast in any Treehouse beer. WB-06 is diastaticus.
 
couchsending said:
I still find it incredibly hard to believe that there is any diastaticus yeast in any Treehouse beer. WB-06 is diastaticus.
Click to expand...
The comment section of that site raises a good point. If anyone could do analysis on a commercial beer that we know has only one strain how many yeasts would be found?
 
couchsending said:
I still find it incredibly hard to believe that there is any diastaticus yeast in any Treehouse beer. WB-06 is diastaticus.
Click to expand...
Have the same thoughts after finding out about wb06 being sta1 positive AFTER we’d been using it in our yeast blend. Oops.

but- if the folks who are seeing f2/cbc in there are correct then it’s entirely possible that solves the problem of diastaticus yeast in an unfiltered beer.
 
beervoid said:
The comment section of that site raises a good point. If anyone could do analysis on a commercial beer that we know has only one strain how many yeasts would be found?
Click to expand...
After playing around with multiple combinations and sampling about a zillion IPAs I’m now under the impression that house flavor is not purely from yeast.
 
TBryerton said:
After playing around with multiple combinations and sampling about a zillion IPAs I’m now under the impression that house flavor is not purely from yeast.
Click to expand...
What I meant to say is, perhaps its common to find more yeasts in a sample? There are many yeasts in the air, could they be picked up?
How pure is the sample of the bottle?
 

Similar threads

Northern_Brewer
From the lab - family tree of White Labs yeast
2
Replies
77
Views
17K
SkiHazy
SkiHazy
wps-hbt2

Latest posts

Back
Top