I've seen threads on low oxygen brewing and the claims of superior beer. It's also been common practice, even required practice, to aerate the wort. How does this work? I've always poured wort back and forth between buckets to aerate it.
This crew might know a little about yeast Edward T Hammersmith.
That's a little bit like saying, "listen to us, we're different". Marketing blah, blah, blah. It ignores groundbreaking omics science that clearly shows even a few °C is enough to push yeast metabolism away from fermentation to delay the process by hours. This guy reckons yeast eat each other when they warm up to pitching temperature? Maybe he needs to learn some basic time management skills? And some basic biology, too.
Don't worry too much about random posters on HBT. It's pretty basic biology, understood for decades and confirmed by groundbreaking research using some of the most sophisticated platforms ever engineered. I guess it's just not the same as a pro yeast farmer in a hairnet talking crap on YouTubeYour right, he's only is a professional yeast farmer, so he's gotta be blowing smoke. He clearly should listen to some random poster on HBT to know what's really up.
Don't worry too much about random posters on HBT. It's pretty basic biology, understood for decades and confirmed by groundbreaking research using some of the most sophisticated platforms ever engineered. I guess it's just not the same as a pro yeast farmer in a hairnet talking crap on YouTube
Anyone can do a search and read publicly available science databases these days. Why don't you let the pro hairnet guy know what you find? Do you need some keys words, like yeast, stress response, growth arrest, omics?I am definitely interested in your sources, please post links for everyone to read and learn.
Anyone can do a search and read publicly available science databases these days. Why don't you let the pro hairnet guy know what you find? Do you need some keys words, like yeast, stress response, growth arrest, omics?
Another process I've seen in LoDO discussions is pitching the yeast first, then aerate with bottled O2 through a sintered stone. The thought is that doing it this way gives the O2 less chance to oxidize the wort, since the oxygen-hungry yeast will consume it as quickly as it is injected. I've done it both ways. It makes sense on the surface and the process isn't more or less complicated either way. That said, I have not detected a difference with either method in the finished beer.Best lodo practice is to pitch then aerate. I have found if you pitch the appropriate amount of yeast for the temperature you will ferment at from a vitality starter it is sufficient without aeration at all, liquid or dry. Time to low kräusen, high kräusen and FG are the metrics I watch. Mashing for fermentability does decrease fermentation time for me when more simple sugars are available for the yeast early on.
Try different methods and see what flavors you end up with and if you are happy with them. My house ale and lager yeasts are quite happy from a vitality starter with zero aeration.
Another process I've seen in LoDO discussions is pitching the yeast first, then aerate with bottled O2 through a sintered stone. The thought is that doing it this way gives the O2 less chance to oxidize the wort, since the oxygen-hungry yeast will consume it as quickly as it is injected. I've done it both ways. It makes sense on the surface and the process isn't more or less complicated either way. That said, I have not detected a difference with either method in the finished beer.
That's a little bit like saying, "listen to us, we're different". Marketing blah, blah, blah. It ignores groundbreaking omics science that clearly shows even a few °C is enough to push yeast metabolism away from fermentation to delay the process by hours. This guy reckons yeast eat each other when they warm up to pitching temperature? Maybe he needs to learn some basic time management skills? And some basic biology, too.
Your right, he's only is a professional yeast farmer, so he's gotta be blowing smoke. He clearly should listen to some random poster on HBT to know what's really up.
Like I typed, science databases. Google Scholar, if you can"t find anything else.Please don't tell me that Google is your "groundbreaking research using some of the most sophisticated platforms ever engineered".
I'd love to see somebody find the research that supports brewing yeast cannibalize each other. There are microbes with the ability to kill competitors to protect scarce resources but I've never seen mention of commercially available brewing strains doing that and killing competitors is not the same as eating them. Maybe he means cells die and release nutrients back into solution that other yeast cells uptake and simply explained it in an inarticulate manner.
Like I typed, science databases. Google Scholar, if you can"t find anything else.
Yeast go dormant when resources run out, like at the end of fermentation, when they flocculate, right? We use refrigeration to help preserve the integrity of organic matter, especially food, including dormant liquid food cultures such as yeast. When pitched into wort yeast express a shock response, regardless. Because of the new environmental conditions. It's easy to assess by measuring the 'lag phase'. A genuine lag phase in healthy yeast pitched at a suitable rate into fermentable wort doesn't last more than a few to several hours. If it does, there is something wrong, even if you accept it works for you. It's considered good practice to limit the shock by bringing refrigerated liquid yeast up to pitching temperature, which, for a few hours on brew day, isn't going to have any negative impact on viability or cannibalistic behaviour. If you disagree with what is established knowledge in yeast biology, you'll need to offer more than the opinions of a yeast salesman talking crap.
I am definitely interested in your sources, please post links for everyone to read and learn.
The math appears to be incorrect about how much to use. As stated in the article, 300 ml of olive oil was used in 168,000 liters of beer. To scale that to 5 gallons (18.9271 liters) solveI have been using olive oil for years. One drop off of a toothpick in 5 gallons of wort is all you need.
https://winning-homebrew.com/olive-oil-in-beer.html
Whose final conclusion after testing are you referring to?O2 is more effective than olive oil. That was the final conclusion after testing. Only about 1/3 of O2 mopped up gets channelled into membrane potential for budding. At least some of the other 2/3 is promoting other apparently beneficial biological process(es). I suspect it simply boils down to a period of more efficient aerobic respiration under the circumstances
The original dissertation that never got published after peer reviewWhose final conclusion after testing are you referring to?
It was a thesis that is linked in the article not a dissertation. Which illustrates why I asked, to be sure what specific publication you are referring to.The original dissertation that never got published after peer review
This is a home brew forum, not a science platform. I haven't submitted anything for peer review here. Reread the dissertation. Olive oil was associated with slower fermentation therefore not considered a viable alternative to O2, at least for commercial breweries. Conclusion: O2 is more effective. If olive oil works for you, as a home brewer, that's great. No one's saying you can't do what you want, are they?It was a thesis that is linked in the article not a dissertation. Which illustrates why I asked, to be sure what specific publication you are referring to.
Next, scientific discussion is not conducted as a mystery. If you make a statement about the results of a study, it is expected that you cite the source, at least by author and year, with the full citation available upon request. That's your responsibility not the audience's. YOU wouldn't get past peer review with that kind of attitude.
So whose final conclusion after testing are you referring to?
Today was the first I heard of it. I was more interested in why OO might be considered as a replacement. So I read the article, then parts of the 35 page thesis submitted by the candidate for MSc Grady Hull. The Word document is called OliveOilThesis.doc. The study has also been published in the the Technical Quarterly of the Master Brewers Association of the Americas in 2007. 45(2007) pp17-23. I can't guarantee it was blind peer reviewed as I don't have access to the journal but I expect it would have had at least some level of peer review.This is a home brew forum, not a science platform. I haven't submitted anything for peer review here. Reread the dissertation. Olive oil was associated with slower fermentation therefore not considered a viable alternative to O2, at least for commercial breweries. Conclusion: O2 is more effective. If olive oil works for you, as a home brewer, that's great. No one's saying you can't do what you want, are they?
Sorry. I used one of the 8 references that cited it and they had it as 2007. Others have it as 2008. That journal goes back to at least 1964 however but they only went online in 2009 I think it said.That thesis (which is a dissertation) lacks a key control - a no O2/no olive oil batch. It is quite possible that such a batch would perform the same as the olive oil batch(es), which did ferment out more slowly. Oddly, I can't find a formally published version of that study. There does not seem to be a 2007 volume of MBAA Technical Quarterly. Given the lack of the critical control sample, it wouldn't surprise me if it never was published as I can't see any reviewer accepting the results.
Edit: it seems to have been published in 2008, not 2007, and I can't get access to it either. I'm shocked it was published.
Sorry. I used one of the 8 references that cited it and they had it as 2007. Others have it as 2008. That journal goes back to at least 1964 however but they only went online in 2009 I think it said.
I get that it could be called a dissertation by calling it new research but the program at the university he attended is a one year program (currently), he had only 2 committee members, it was for a MSc, and it was 35 pages. I'm not going to bag on the guy but few academics are going to call that a dissertation.
It can be hard to get permission to run experiments on production lines where you are interrupting high volume production of goods.
Brad Smith at Beersmith blogged about it back in 2015 but a respondent noted he had the unit types mixed up which he fixed.
Where I come from (the UK) it’s a dissertation, academically speaking. And thesis is reserved for a PhD submission. I find semantics thoroughly boring, personally. In my experience, when there’s no formal research following an interesting, potentially useful idea, it‘s because it turned out to be negative or otherwise inferior to already established practices. No one wants to do worse, do they? Unfortunately, negative results hardly ever get published, unless there’s a con involved.
Enter your email address to join: