Author Topic: Lager or not  (Read 1731 times)

Online dmtaylor

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 3950
    • Manty Malters - Meet the Malters! - Dave Taylor
Re: Lager or not
« Reply #45 on: September 12, 2019, 04:20:06 PM »
I find this information so much easier to search and read than the previous effort.

For example, it looks like WLP830, WY2124 (34/70) is a Saccharomyces cerevisiae x Saccharomyces eubayanus hybrid.

I might be an idiot but I believe that particular hybridization of S.c + S.e = (ONE OF) the definition(s) of S. pastorianus.

So, those are all still confirmed to be "lager" yeasts.
Dave

The world will become a much more pleasant place to live when each and every one of us realizes that we are all idiots.

Offline BrewBama

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 3697
Re: Lager or not
« Reply #46 on: September 12, 2019, 07:07:16 PM »
I find this information so much easier to search and read than the previous effort.

For example, it looks like WLP830, WY2124 (34/70) is a Saccharomyces cerevisiae x Saccharomyces eubayanus hybrid.

I might be an idiot but I believe that particular hybridization of S.c + S.e = (ONE OF) the definition(s) of S. pastorianus.

So, those are all still confirmed to be "lager" yeasts.

I don’t disagree. I didn’t see any pastorianus listed so used the hybrid they list.

I guess my point was the wide ferment variables that yeast can tolerate and still be considered a ‘lager’ is interesting to me.  I would have thought otherwise.

Maybe the DNA percentages makes a difference and possibly when they break out Saaz from Frohberg the picture will become clearer.

Until then (and maybe even after then) I think Robert’s ‘quack like a duck’ rule still applies.  The panda analogy explains it pretty well also.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
“From man’s sweat and God’s love, beer came into the world.” — St. Arnold

Brewed in the Tennessee Valley. Rocket City — Huntsville AL

Offline Robert

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 4214
Re: Lager or not
« Reply #47 on: September 12, 2019, 08:51:09 PM »
Ducks and pandas.  Makes as much sense as anything.  I remember being given an example of the futility of trying to neatly classify species or subspecies, whether by genetic, anatomical, or any other criteria:  Here are a bunch of pencils worn down to varying lengths.  Divide them into two groups, the long ones and the short ones.  Now three groups, long, short, and medium.  You'll always be making a lot of arbitrary decisions at the margins of each group, and it's really all subjective,  unless you accept that each one is an individual with its own unique variant traits, but all are part of a single, unified, larger, group, pencils, which can clearly be distinguished from pens or paintbrushes.  So, ducks, pandas, and pencils pretty much do it for me for right now.
Rob Stein
Akron, Ohio

I'd rather have questions I can't answer than answers I can't question.