So I know certain yeasts are better at biotransformation than others (London III, London Fog, etc.) But what about hops? Has anyone had any particular luck with certain varieties over others? It is tough to get any information on since most styles that are using biotransformation typically have a ton of hops in it. I know a brulosophy-esque experiment would likely yield some data but I am looking to see if anyone has experienced anything of note.
Specific Hops and Biotransformation
- Thread starter Lacasse93
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
PearlJam
Well-Known Member
I incidentally watched this this morning, but can't repeat it myself. There is a portion (the 25min mark) that they discuss this
That might also be because biotransformation is just a myth.
PearlJam
Well-Known Member
I listened to an interview with the brewer from Verdant (they make exceptional juicy ipa's) and he does not do the dryhopping for biotransformation and yet their beers are really good
I'm sure they are but what's your point?
PearlJam
Well-Known Member
You stated that biotransformation could be a myth and I gave you an example of a pro-brewer who doesn't "believe" in it which is in support of your statement. In other words, biotransformation might be overblown in it's effect on juiciness.
PearlJam
Well-Known Member
OK. Different words to get to the same point.
Maybe the fact that english isn't my first language is creating some form of miscommunication
I agree that I think it is overblown but to say it doesnt exist doesnt make sense since there is data showing that it does. Also I think haze wise you typically develop see that more in "biotransfrmed" beers. I do agree with you all in saying it definitely is overrated/overblown but not worthless entirely
I have great results using a combination of WLP-002 English Ale yeast with Amarillo, Cascade, Citra, and Simcoe hops used in a whirlpool and again in dry hopping.
There isn't any scientific evidence that any biotransformation of hops happens at any stage of the brewing process. That doesn't stop marketing departments from using it as the new buzzword though...
Biotransformation is not just a myth but it actually is a real thing and it does happen. Wine makers have been using this for years and studied in beer at the very least for the last 10 years. They also knew about Hop Creep in 1905...and we just rediscovered it recently.
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jf...n of geraniol to,4 days of model fermentation.
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jf...n of geraniol to,4 days of model fermentation.
This study keeps being touted as the "proof" that there is biotransformation. If one looks at the actual study you'll see that it contains no proof of actual biotransformation. All they've done is measure the evolution of hop compounds during fermentation of dy-hopped test batches and then there's a lot of "might" and "could" to try and link the data to a biotransformation process for which they provide no direct evidence. They're basically trying to explain the data they gathered by means of speculation which is not direct proof.
On the other hand there is plenty of literature proving that regular Saccharomyces yeast do not secrete any enzymes that might be responsible for what one might call biotransformation. Direct uptake and metabolization of hop compounds by yeast is clearly impossible as there are no available transport mechanisms so all we're left with is external enzyme secretion which has been proven not to happen.
On the other hand there is plenty of literature proving that regular Saccharomyces yeast do not secrete any enzymes that might be responsible for what one might call biotransformation. Direct uptake and metabolization of hop compounds by yeast is clearly impossible as there are no available transport mechanisms so all we're left with is external enzyme secretion which has been proven not to happen.
There's plenty of alternative explanations. For example fermentation dynamics such as convection and gas evolution combined with selective adsorption by yeast. This would require more in-depth research as until there is direct proof they're all equally valid hypothesis. On second thought they're not really equally valid as their hypothesis relies on enzymes being secreted by the yeast and there is published research proving that saccharomyces does not have this capability (but others like Brett do) which would invalidate their theory already at the hypothesis stage.
