Author Topic: Yeast Study on Chico Strains  (Read 2729 times)

Offline denny

  • Administrator
  • Retired with too much time on my hands
  • *****
  • Posts: 24610
  • Noti OR [1991.4, 287.6deg] AR
    • Dennybrew
Re: Yeast Study on Chico Strains
« Reply #30 on: February 02, 2021, 06:05:39 pm »
This is definitely “inside baseball” for yeast nerds.

I need help with this one.

Baseball is a famously boring American game made tolerable through beer and hot dogs. "Inside baseball" is a term referring to a discussion so technical or esoteric no quantity of beer or hot dogs could make it tolerable for the layperson.

BR-97 is an improved version of BR-96, and might be the source for 1056 is what I'm reading. 7407 is a lager strain, and not related to BR-96?

I had thought US05 was the Chico strain, is that not the case?

Assuming 1056 is, then US05 is also.
Life begins at 60.....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

The best, sharpest, funniest, weirdest and most knowledgable minds in home brewing contribute on the AHA forum. - Alewyfe

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell

Offline denny

  • Administrator
  • Retired with too much time on my hands
  • *****
  • Posts: 24610
  • Noti OR [1991.4, 287.6deg] AR
    • Dennybrew
Re: Yeast Study on Chico Strains
« Reply #31 on: February 02, 2021, 06:06:41 pm »
One of the SN personnel on a podcast said that the house strain is now more flocculant than the commercial Chico strains. If find it plausible that BRY-97 is the SN house strain.

I might try and bump up the SN yeast from bottles of Pale Ale. Anyone know that the use the same strain for bottling?

According to my sources there and what I learned at Beer Camp, yes they do.
Life begins at 60.....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

The best, sharpest, funniest, weirdest and most knowledgable minds in home brewing contribute on the AHA forum. - Alewyfe

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell

Offline hopfenundmalz

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 10261
  • Milford, MI
Re: Yeast Study on Chico Strains
« Reply #32 on: February 02, 2021, 08:14:39 pm »
One of the SN personnel on a podcast said that the house strain is now more flocculant than the commercial Chico strains. If find it plausible that BRY-97 is the SN house strain.

I might try and bump up the SN yeast from bottles of Pale Ale. Anyone know that the use the same strain for bottling?

According to my sources there and what I learned at Beer Camp, yes they do.

I was pretty sure of that, but wanted verification. Thanks.
Jeff Rankert
AHA Lifetime Member
BJCP National
Ann Arbor Brewers Guild
Home-brewing, not just a hobby, it is a lifestyle!

Offline YeastIsInteresting

  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Yeast Study on Chico Strains
« Reply #33 on: February 02, 2021, 09:05:36 pm »
This is definitely “inside baseball” for yeast nerds.

I need help with this one.

Baseball is a famously boring American game made tolerable through beer and hot dogs. "Inside baseball" is a term referring to a discussion so technical or esoteric no quantity of beer or hot dogs could make it tolerable for the layperson.

BR-97 is an improved version of BR-96, and might be the source for 1056 is what I'm reading. 7407 is a lager strain, and not related to BR-96?

I had thought US05 was the Chico strain, is that not the case?

Thank you for the explanation.

Offline Saccharomyces

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1030
  • Deus ex machina
Re: Yeast Study on Chico Strains
« Reply #34 on: February 02, 2021, 09:25:07 pm »
To summarise and to remain on topic, is the consensus that Y-7407 (Ballentine Beer Pitching Strain) was banked at Siebel as BRY-96.  This was then subsequently picked up by Sierra Nevada and has since become known as Chico.  Lallemand released BRY-96 rather confusingly as BRY-97, and hence is the true dry form of SN's Chico strain?  Is this potentially a lager strain?  How does the Narragansett deposit information tie in with all this?

Anyway, I'm now tempted to try NCYC 4307!

No, BRY-96 has a different, yet to be identified source.  Chris Large is the graduate student on the team that is studying brewhouse mutations of BRY-96 and its offspring.  Through genetic sequencing, the team has determined that BRY-96 does not descend from Y-7407 or Y-7408.

Ballantine was purchased by Falstaff in 1972.  Falstaff had previously purchased Narragansett in 1965.  When Falstaff closed Ballantine, production of Ballantine XXX ale was moved to Narragansett.  We have all assumed that the ale culture was moved to Narragansett as well.  However, it clearly was not moved if BRY-96 was deposited by Narragansett because the reception date for BRY-96 of 4/1/1967 predates the move by seven years.  The original Siebel yeast culture publication stated that BRY-96 came from a brewery formerly operating on the East Coast.   It was assumed that Ballantine was the brewery to whom Siebel was referring because Ballantine is the only defunct historical ale brewery anyone under age 80 or so can remember.





By the way, Y-7408 is a true top-cropper.  It is rumored that the culture was brought to this country from Scotland by Arhibald MacKechnie who was one of Ballantine’s brewmasters.  Here is what Y-7408 looked like in use at Ballantine:




With the information that Eric has added to this thread about Narragansett acquiring the Hanley Brewing Company's brands, James Hanley may be the original U.S. source for BRY-96.  The James Hanley Brewing Company owned Rhode Island's largest ale brewery, as can be seen on the beer tray at this URL: http://trayman.net/TrayDetail/Animals/hanleys%20Red.htm


Offline YeastIsInteresting

  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Yeast Study on Chico Strains
« Reply #35 on: February 03, 2021, 10:06:33 am »
OK, so very much tying in with what my Lallemand contact stated.  BRY-96 was deposited by Narragansett in 1967.  Lallemand released BRY-96 as...BRY-97...according to this person.  Which is odd.

Offline erockrph

  • Official Poobah of No Life. (I Got Ban Hammered by Drew)
  • *********
  • Posts: 7223
  • Chepachet, RI
    • The Hop WHisperer
Re: Yeast Study on Chico Strains
« Reply #36 on: February 03, 2021, 04:29:25 pm »
With the information that Eric has added to this thread about Narragansett acquiring the Hanley Brewing Company's brands, James Hanley may be the original U.S. source for BRY-96.  The James Hanley Brewing Company owned Rhode Island's largest ale brewery, as can be seen on the beer tray at this URL: http://trayman.net/TrayDetail/Animals/hanleys%20Red.htm

Given that Hanley built several other breweries in the pre-prohibition era going back to the late 1800's, it is very possible that the yeast strain that became synonymous with one of the most prominent California breweries in the late 20th century can be traced back through late 19th-century Rhode Island, taking it from one corner of the country to the other. Sort of like Ancestry.com for yeast strains :)

Also, this really makes me want to try to hunt down Hanley's Extra Pale Ale recipe.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2021, 04:31:03 pm by erockrph »
Eric B.

Finally got around to starting a homebrewing blog: The Hop Whisperer

Offline BrewBama

  • Official Poobah of No Life. (I Got Ban Hammered by Drew)
  • *********
  • Posts: 4811
Re: Yeast Study on Chico Strains
« Reply #37 on: February 03, 2021, 05:17:48 pm »
...
Also, this really makes me want to try to hunt down Hanley's Extra Pale Ale recipe.

If you find it please share. Sounds good.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
wisdom is proved right by her deeds

Brewed in the Tennessee Valley. Rocket City — Huntsville AL

Offline Saccharomyces

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1030
  • Deus ex machina
Re: Yeast Study on Chico Strains
« Reply #38 on: February 03, 2021, 09:22:00 pm »
Okay, I stand corrected and down the rabbit hole we go. While most of the Narragansett advertising that one finds on the web is focused on their lager product, searching for breweriana revealed that Narragansett historically brewed what they labeled “Half Stock Banquet Ale.”   While I am probably most likely wrong, it appears that the lager product received more focus after the acquisition of the James Hanley Brewing Company. I do not know why that is so, but Rudolph Haffenreffer passed away in 1954, leaving his sons in charge of Narragansett, so that may have had something to do with the company’s shift in focus.  I still believe that there is a chance that Narragansett’s ale culture may have originated with Hanley because Hanley predated their opening.  It was not uncommon for breweries to share yeast cultures.

What I want to know is what prompted Narragansett to bank the culture with Siebel?  Falstaff owned Narragansett in 1967.  Did Falstaff’s or Narragansett’s management team decide to get out of ale production?  If Narragansett banked the culture with Siebel, then they may have also banked it with Wallerstein Labs, which had its own culture collection (there are several Wallerstain cultures in the ARS NRRL).  J.E. Siebel and Max Wallerstein where contemporaries.  They were both brewing scientists.   Something that a lot of people do not know is that the Anchor Steam culture is not a historical steam beer culture.  Anchor acquired it from Wallerstein Labs in the mid-seventies.  That was when Fritz Maytag was overhauling Anchor to improve quality.   There is some evidence that the Anchor culture descends from the Christian Schmidt lager culture, which Siebel holds as BRY-118.  It is available from Wyeast as 2272-PC North American Lager.

Back to the rabbit hole...
« Last Edit: February 07, 2021, 04:24:07 pm by Saccharomyces »

Offline Saccharomyces

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1030
  • Deus ex machina
Re: Yeast Study on Chico Strains
« Reply #39 on: February 07, 2021, 04:22:37 pm »
I am hedging my bets on the origin of the yeast culture known as BRY-96. Here's the latest addition to my brewery (not the Thermapen).



« Last Edit: February 07, 2021, 04:25:18 pm by Saccharomyces »

Offline dmtaylor

  • Official Poobah of No Life. (I Got Ban Hammered by Drew)
  • *********
  • Posts: 4341
  • Lord Idiot the Lazy
    • YEAST MASTER Perma-Living
Re: Yeast Study on Chico Strains
« Reply #40 on: February 07, 2021, 05:36:09 pm »
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 Saccharomyces

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1030
  • Deus ex machina
Re: Yeast Study on Chico Strains
« Reply #41 on: February 07, 2021, 06:48:47 pm »
Well, the one guy who knew for certain left this world in 2017.  I would have loved to been able to pick his brain for a few hours.

https://www.narragansettbeer.com/2017/03/celebrating-the-life-of-bill-anderson?age-verified=29d235af98

Offline Descardeci

  • Assistant Brewer
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
Re: Yeast Study on Chico Strains
« Reply #42 on: February 18, 2021, 07:36:58 pm »
Wow all the information, this was a awesome topic