Yeast immobilization: magic beans of fermentation

[emjay]

Beer B, C: still quite green, significant acetaldehyde; very "British", with fruit tones (apples, grapes) and sweetness. Muddled and harsh hop bitterness.
Beer A: Very, very clean. Not quite bland, but rather thin mouthfeel. Hops punch through, stay neutral. Grain.

Beer A is quite possibly like that due entirely to the lack of carbonation. Hopefully you'll still have enough by the end of this to do a similar tasting with carbonated samples.

I mentioned early in the MuPor thread that the ester profile would probably be nonexistent. Despite several parties insisting that this wouldn't be an issue (for various reasons), it just didn't seem possible for yeast with totally (or almost totally) inhibited reproduction to produce a "normal" ester profile, so it shouldn't really be much of a surprise (nor is it). However, even though it validates what I (and others, including yourself) have said, I'm not quite ready to call it confirmed just yet, based solely on a single tasting. Obviously there needs to be a number of samples, preferably using very different types of yeast. I think at the very l least there ought to be an extreme-ester Belgian bubblegum strain, which should be (separately) fermented at both high AND low temperatures.

Still, that's only a huge problem for certain beer styles. At this point, I'm not really seeing much of a downside with neutral beers, and most wines and other fermented beverages (yet). To me, wine in particular seems like a great potential use for this, especially since it's (usually) not carbonated, and because yeast sediment generally isn't tolerated in wine nearly as much as it's tolerated in beer. Not to mention that it could have great implications for backsweetening by hobbyists. Of course, this depends on whether or not enough yeast is left behind to restart fermentation (see last paragraph).

That's actually what I've been speculating. I didn't rinse the beads particularly well after I made them for the beer batch, though I did for the sugar water batch. It could be that that made the difference.

Doubt it. The sugar water obviously just doesn't have break material. I wouldn't expect it at all to have sediment nor even a krausen regardless.

One experiment that would be very worthwhile though would be to test if enough yeast "falls off" (or whatever) to meaningfully ferment, determining if simply removing the beads is a viable alternative to pasteurization in a more conclusive manner than just a visual assessment of the sediment. Basically, just ferment a batch, remove the beads, and then add more fermentable sugars (as a boiled or even sterilized solution, if possible). Needless to say, it needs to be given much more time in order to distinguish between a non-fermenting sample and a sample that is merely fermenting slowly. If it appears that it DOES still ferment, the same experiment should be carried out with the exact same beads several more times (minimum), in order to rule out not only accidental infection, but also to take into account the possibility that any yeast present might have merely "washed off" from the outside of the beads.

 

[Hermit]

The risk of bottle bombs when using live yeast is just too big a threat at this point and could take YEARS to fully resolve by experiment by the home brewer. At what point are you comfortable giving a bottle to someone?

 

[MalFet]

The risk of bottle bombs when using live yeast is just too big a threat at this point and could take YEARS to fully resolve by experiment by the home brewer. At what point are you comfortable giving a bottle to someone?

Hmm...interesting. Why do you think there's more of a risk with the beads than with regular yeast?

 

[Hermit]

Hmm...interesting. Why do you think there's more of a risk with the beads than with regular yeast?

I guess I didn't write my post well enough to continue the train of thought. My concern was when he mentioned "back sweetening". If you have a few live cells they might take a very long time to reproduce enough 'bud'dies to consume all of the sugar.

 

[MalFet]

I guess I didn't write my post well enough to continue the train of thought. My concern was when he mentioned "back sweetening". If you have a few live cells they might take a very long time to reproduce enough 'bud'dies to consume all of the sugar.

Oh right. That's definitely true. I strongly suspect that there is yeast in suspension even under ideal circumstances. The no-pasteurize thing is a very cool idea and fully worth exploring, but I'm skeptical that it will work.

 

[emjay]

The risk of bottle bombs when using live yeast is just too big a threat at this point and could take YEARS to fully resolve by experiment by the home brewer. At what point are you comfortable giving a bottle to someone?

I'm not sure. I'd probably start with a month using plenty of fermentables in a test (ie not with bottles). If I were to do it myself, I'd do a few other samples alongside it, maybe using (for example) a single "grain" of dry yeast, perhaps a couple more with the "pitch" increasing by an order of magnitude each time, and maybe even from the tip of an inoculating loop using plating technique to reduce it to a "single" cell. Then I could see how long those take to get a sense of how long I need to wait for the un-beaded sample. I'd most likely do all these experiments at a slightly elevated temperature, probably in the 80°-100° range.

And of course, a control - if nothing else, just as some extra assurance that my process is adequately sanitary, to help rule out fermentation as a fluke.

I might even put a small sample (safely) away for an extended period of time, perhaps several years, just for added confidence, though I'd feel more than comfortable enough if the experiment resulted in no change detected after a month.

I moved last year and still haven't finished putting together a new electric brewery in my new place, so I haven't brewed here even once yet. Otherwise I'd just go ahead and do all these things instead of talking about it.

 

[Hermit]

I'm not sure. <snip>

Way too many variables. When safety is concerned, I stick by my "years" time line.

 

[Obliviousbrew]

Have your think about using a reverse spherification technique instead of what your using? in molecular gastronomy the direct spherefication it´s made just like you did but with the reverse technique the membrane it´s a lot less thick, basicly what you do is add a little calcium (if your base ingrediente has not already haves calcium) and put it in an alginate bath, you do it the other way around. I do this with my spheric mozzarella, the difference is that when you use the direct method, with the caviar for instance, the little beads keep hardenind even after you take them aout of the calcium bath, with the indirect method it stops soon as you remove the bead from the alginate.

 

[passedpawn]

Have your think about using a reverse spherification technique instead of what your using? in molecular gastronomy the direct spherefication it´s made just like you did but with the reverse technique the membrane it´s a lot less thick, basicly what you do is add a little calcium (if your base ingrediente has not already haves calcium) and put it in an alginate bath, you do it the other way around. I do this with my spheric mozzarella, the difference is that when you use the direct method, with the caviar for instance, the little beads keep hardenind even after you take them aout of the calcium bath, with the indirect method it stops soon as you remove the bead from the alginate.

So your point would be to produce a softer or more porous bead?

 

[MalFet]

Interesting prospect. I'm not actualy convinced that permeability is the limiting factor so much as plain old stratification. But, I haven't yet figured out an easy way to test this. On my next batch, I've considered using a stirplate throughout.

 

[pentirei]

I noticed some of the products listed on the Scott Laboratories link posted earlier are listed as "double encapsulated." I imagine if that if yeast budding off the beads was at all concern, one could always take the beads, coat them in the alginate solution again, and quickly throw them back into the calcium-containing solution. That should effectively trap any surface yeast underneath another layer of alginate...right?

...though as I'm typing this I'm wondering if limiting yeast "escape" is really important enough to make the effort.

This is a truly fascinating thread.

 

[Obliviousbrew]

So your point would be to produce a softer or more porous bead?

Exactly

 

[WortMonger]

Any more tasting news or news all together MalFet? I'm so pumped to see where this goes.

 

[Radegast]

I can't anyone who sells ProMalic on a homebrew scale, but you can get schizosaccaromyces pombe from scientific supply companies. I wonder how close we could get to homemade ProMalic. The cider maker in my homebrew club would do a backflip if we could cure his malic woes.

 

[MalFet]

Any more tasting news or news all together MalFet? I'm so pumped to see where this goes.

Nothing yet! Both beers are pretty clear. I usually bottle my small English ales after 10-12 days, but I was thinking about giving these a full two weeks just to make sure the comparison isn't skewed if the control tastes young.

Anyone have thoughts on that test? Should I cold condition for a bit first? How much carbonation? There are always too many variables, alas.

 

[fizgig]

If I were you, I would do what I always do. No sense changing your process and the yeast process, especially if you decide to start using these yeast beads all the time but you don't normally cold crash or raise/lower CO2 vols and your experiment was a success, then you'd be stuck wondering if you need to keep cold crashing or always carb to 2.7 vols instead of 2.3 or whatever.

 

[phuff7129]

Subscribed

 

[matteroftaste]

subbed too. this is great!

 

[Navy_Chief]

Great experiment, I am anxiously awaiting the results.

Based on the experiences and experiments of others I suspect that this is not going to be a viable alternative for any beer with any yeast character at all. My understanding is that if you pitch at such a rate as to prevent reproduction of the yeast you get an extremely clean beer as a finished result, often to the detriment of the finished beer.

I am going to look into this for cider and mead production, this could greatly simplify and shorten clearing the finished products. As others have already said there is a need for some experimentation to determine how much yeast drops off from the beads and what it's impact attempting to stop fermentation would be.

 

[passedpawn]

Some other possible advantages of using immobilized yeast:

1. Blends. If you combine yeasts, after a few generations the ratio might be off. With the beads, the ratio of the two (or more yeasts) stays the same. I use two yeasts when I make saison (Wyeast 3724 followed by 3711). I could separate them again with beads.
2. Reduced contamination from brett in the brewery. Assuming the yeast can be completely contained during fermentation, I wouldn't need to worry about my equipment being contaminated when fermenting with brett. This would probably require a second protective layer on the bead that did not contain any yeast to make sure none falls off. Could this work for bacteria, too?

 

[user 51917]

im in thanks for doing the work

 

[brant740]

Great thread! I was excited to see it was 18 pages long and started last week by the time I found it.

If this works, I'm going back to my stir plate idea for primary fermentation since I won't have to fight the fallen yeast. Since I'm under positive pressure constantly, I wouldn't have the O2 going into the fermenting beer like in a starter to worry about and it would move the beer around the beads for greater yeast to beer contact. I'm in a Sanke so I plan on side wall stir bar agitation with a more spherical type of stir bar. My thoughts go to containing the beads in larger tea balls so they don't have any possibility of going into my dip tube when transferring to my serving keg.

Man this is a great experiment and I can't wait to see when tasting comes into the equation.

If there is no sediment would you need to transfer to another keg for serving?
Sounds like this method with pressurized fermentation could really shorten the time from grain to glass.

 

[Beergazzi]

What would be cool, even if this doesn't make 'great' beer, would be straining/scooping out the beads before bottling, and then adding a 'bead' to each bottle and bottle carbing and being able to pour the beer quickly without sediment (mostly so I would only have to tell people who do not know how to pour one, to 'just dont drink the bead')

 

[hopdoc]

'just dont drink the bead')

Its like a worm at the bottom of a bottle of tequila.... I would eat the bead, and the worm.

 

[Hermit]

How about making a small addition to the beads?
http://empco.org/edu/index.php/pyrocystis-fusiformis-11.html

 

[MalFet]

How about making a small addition to the beads?
http://empco.org/edu/index.php/pyrocystis-fusiformis-11.html

Cool! :cross:

 

[BBL_Brewer]

subscribed.....I wonder what else I've been missing out on when I go fishing

 

[Zider]

this is great.

couple of tweaks you might like,

1) foam the gels, with pinch sod bicarb, (increase surf area)
2) to make a skin that don't leak yeast, dip in a weak food grade chitosan solution, (dissolve in citric or lactic acid, pH 4). This will make a complex coz alginate -ve and chitosan is +ve

Amazingly good already though, excellent for controlling bottle carb sediment. When I used to make home brew as a kid they had a yeast in the kits that sedimented as a jelly layer on bottom.Same idea but this beats it hands down.

 

[brant740]

Interesting prospect. I'm not actualy convinced that permeability is the limiting factor so much as plain old stratification. But, I haven't yet figured out an easy way to test this. On my next batch, I've considered using a stirplate throughout.

Stir plate sounds like a fun experiment, but if you are going to add electricity to the mix why not recirculate the wort through a packed column of beads. You could use a whole house water filter with clear housing to hold beads or pack a pipe with beads.

 

[passedpawn]

Stir plate sounds like a fun experiment, but if you are going to add electricity to the mix why not recirculate the wort through a packed column of beads. You could use a whole house water filter with clear housing to hold beads or pack a pipe with beads.

Hmmm...