[S. cerevisiae]

I finally got around to propagating NCYC 1108 from slant yesterday.   For those who have never heard of the strain, NCYC 1108 is the reference strain for type I mutual aggregation.  Mutual aggregation is a phenomenon where two non-flocculent strains co-flocculate when used together.  The other mutual aggregation reference strain is NCYC 1109.  It is the reference strain for type II mutual aggregation.  Type I and type II strains co-flocculate when pitched together.   Any non-flocculent strain that co-flocculates with NCYC 1108 is considered to be a type II strain whereas any strain that co-flocculates with NCYC 1109 is considered to be a type I strain.  Strains of yeast that do not co-flocculate with NCYC 1008 or NCYC 1109 are considered to be type III strains.  Unlike adding a flocculant strain such as Wyeast 1968/WLP002 to a batch to sediment a non-flocculent pitching yeast (see Kara Taylor's NHC 2014 presentation), both NCYC 1108 and NCYC 1109 are non-flocculent when used individually.

With that said, NCYC 1108 is another strain for which I have almost no brewing data; hence, it is another box of chocolates culture (Forest Gump reference).  All I know is that it is a chain former that was sourced from a British Brewery. While not all yeast strains that form a yeast head are chain formers, chain forming yeast strains tend to form a yeast head.  Chain formation occurs when daughter cells fail to completely detach from mother cells during budding.

[erockrph]

Good luck! Any idea what kind of beer you're going to brew with it? Or do you wait to see how it behaves when you prop it up before you decide that?

[hopfenundmalz]

The more I know about yeast, I find I have much to learn about yeast. Thanks for the post S. C.

[S. cerevisiae]

The more I know about yeast, I find I have much to learn about yeast. Thanks for the post S. C.

That makes two of us!

[S. cerevisiae]

Good luck! Any idea what kind of beer you're going to brew with it? Or do you wait to see how it behaves when you prop it up before you decide that?

I will more than likely just brew a drinkable pale ale.  That's pretty much all I brew these days. 

[S. cerevisiae]

I stepped the culture to 600ml this evening.  NCYC 1108 seems to sediment well, but it does not appear to flocculate at all. The sediment is easily disturbed.  This fermentation is going to be interesting.

[ynotbrusum]

So are you avoiding a stir plate with this one?

[S. cerevisiae]

So are you avoiding a stir plate with this one?

Yes, it is a shaken starter.  The interesting thing is that I recently discovered that Steven Deeds (Woodland Brewing Research) arrived at the same conclusion as I have with respect to stir plates.  He found that the increase over a non-stirred starter was on the order of 9%, which is insignificant in a process where biomass grows at a rate of 2ⁿ, where n equals the number of minutes that have elapsed since the end of the lag phase divided by 90.  In effect, there is no appreciable gain in biomass growth over a well-shaken starter, and one does not have worry about sterilizing a stir bar (or at least sanitizing it well) or laying out the cash for a stir plate. 

[reverseapachemaster]

Were you able to track down what British brewery is the source for this strain?

[bengelbrau]

"He found that the increase over a non-stirred starter was on the order of 9%, which is insignificant in a process where biomass "

I just love to find good reasons to not spend money, effort and time! Thanks, SC

[narcout]

He found that the increase over a non-stirred starter was on the order of 9%

Does "non-stirred" in this context mean shaken or no agitation whatsoever?

[S. cerevisiae]

Does "non-stirred" in this context mean shaken or no agitation whatsoever?

In this context, "non-stirred" means non-continuously stirred. In effect, continuous stirring showed no appreciable increase in biomass growth over a starter that is shaken immediately after inoculation and periodically swirled if necessary. 

[69franx]

Does "non-stirred" in this context mean shaken or no agitation whatsoever?

In this context, "non-stirred" means non-continuously stirred. In effect, continuous stirring showed no appreciable increase in biomass growth over a starter that is shaken immediately after inoculation and periodically swirled if necessary.

Mark, I love your new tag line!

[blatz]

I just boil my stir bar, hasn't been that much of a problem.

one thing I have noticed that I like about stirring a starter, particularly if stepping up, is that the stirring tends to reduce blowoff loss. 

you know way more than i want to about yeast Mark!

[S. cerevisiae]

Were you able to track down what British brewery is the source for this strain?

The National Collection of Yeast Cultures (NCYC) in the UK does a great job of anonymizing their cultures.  To further complicate matters, this culture was deposited over fifty years ago when the institution housing the collection was known as the Brewing Industry Research Foundation (BIRF).  To the best of my knowledge, NCYC 1108 has been out circulation as a brewing culture for a long time.  I can only find references to its use in research papers.