Wyeast 3724 Belgian Saison Stall

[duncan.brown]

I know there are a thousand threads on the 3724 saison stall, but this isn't a yeast I normally use so here's my data point. I pitched a nice healthy batch of 3724 from a 1.6 gal starter into 5.5 gal of 1.056 wort at 80F. This was my daugter's first brew day and I wanted bubbles before bedtime

After 3 hours, the 5.5 gal batch was bubbling away like crazy. I don't have any open temperature controlled space right now, so the beer is sat in my 70F basement. I've read about open fermenting 3724, so I removed the airlock from my BrewBucket and covered it with a piece of foil once the krausen was nice and fluffy at 2" thick. By the next morning, the krausen had dropped to a thin foam on top of the beer, with patches of beer visible. The gravity was 1.044 (on the tilt) confirmed as 1.042 with a hydrometer sample. It's pretty much been stuck there ever since.

The fast fermentation test was down to 1.004 within 72 hours, so there are plenty of fermentable sugars in the wort and the yeast was good. So I got the stall, even with no airlock on the BrewBucket... Maybe because I let the temperature drop from 80F to 70F?

I didn't want to risk oxidation, so I put the airlock back on after the krausen had dropped. I've seen posts that it can take 3724 a month to get to final when this happens. I'm in no rush with this beer (my chronicle will be open by my next brew day), so I'm just going to wait it out and see.

 

[bjhbrew]

I did my first saison with wy3724 this spring after trying a few other strains, I had a similar experience as you for the first days and then it petered out. I even went to keg it at week 7 assuming it was done but my pre transfer hydrometer reading reported still at 1.035! At this point I almost gave up but just threw it back in the chamber at 80ish F and wouldn’t you know it, it picked up right away and soldiered on down to 1.004 in a couple days.
TLDR:took 8 weeks total and was the first saison I’ve made that to me tasted as good or better than local craft offerings

 

[duncan.brown]

Wow, 8 weeks! Hopefully this turns out well with enough time.

I'm doing a lager in my chronicle next, so maybe I'll take the heat belt off and use it to warm up the brew bucket a bit as well.

 

[bjhbrew]

Yup, and then I repitched about 2/3 cup of the slurry into another saison and it was done in less than a week. Go figure.

 

[duncan.brown]

Nice, I'll definitely try that.

 

[MikeCo]

I think the stall is most likely due to the temperature drop. That yeast likes to be warm, and most yeasts don’t react well to cooling after fermentation begins. Heat it up to 80 or even 90 to get it to finish faster. See Wyeast recommendations here:

https://wyeastlab.com/yeast-strain/belgian-saison

 

[rhys333]

Wow, 8 weeks! Hopefully this turns out well with enough time.

I'm doing a lager in my chronicle next, so maybe I'll take the heat belt off and use it to warm up the brew bucket a bit as well.

Don't throw that 3724 yeast out! First generation is notoriously slow, but that second gen slurry will ferment FAST... as in just a few days. It's as fast or faster than 3711.

 

[Vale71]

Don't throw that 3724 yeast out! First generation is notoriously slow, but that second gen slurry will ferment FAST... as in just a few days. It's as fast or faster than 3711.

He made a starter.

 

[rhys333]

He made a starter.

That doesn't make a difference. It needs to get used to his brew setup before it will ferment without stalling. It sounds like brewlore but it is 100% true with this yeast strain.

 

[Vale71]

Yeah, right, like fermenting without an airlock... I wonder what it is about this strain that causes so much nonsense to be spread around.

 

[VikeMan]

It needs to get used to his brew setup before it will ferment without stalling. It sounds like brewlore but it is 100% true with this yeast strain.

So, 3-4 generations and the colony has adapted to a specific fermenter configuration? This strain ought to be walking on land and eating insects by now.

 

[duncan.brown]

I think the stall is most likely due to the temperature drop.

Thanks, that's what I was thinking as well. 70F seems to be at the bottom of the range for 3724. I'll bump the temp this weekend and see what happens.

 

[duncan.brown]

It needs to get used to his brew setup before it will ferment without stalling. It sounds like brewlore but it is 100% true with this yeast strain.

Your brewlore is not inconsistent with this description of the behavior of yeast:

The lag phase represents a period of zero growth and is exhibited when inoculum cells experience a change of nutritional status or alterations in physical growth conditions (e.g. temperature, osmolarity). The precise duration of the lag phase is dependent not only on growth conditions but also on inoculation density and the growth 'history' of the inoculum. The lag phase represents the time required for inoculated yeast cells to adapt to their new physical and chemical growth environment by synthesizing ribosomes and enzymes needed to establish growth at a higher rate.

Sec. 4.3.2, pp. 132-133, Yeast Physiology and Biotechnology, Graeme M. Walker, Wiley (1998).​

So I can quite believe that a re-pitch where the colony has adapted its organelles to the wort environment will exhibit different characteristics than the original pure strain propagated in a starter.

Definitely going to give re-pitching a go with this strain, thanks!

 

[Vale71]

It takes far worse to make yeast "un-adapt" to fermenting beer wort, for example growth in a medium that's made up exclusively of simple sugars causing the yeast to stop producing the enzymes needed to process more complex sugars (maltose, maltoriose) and therefore possibly (but not necessarily) to stall as the former are exhausted. The differences between a starter and actual beer wort are way too small to be the root cause of such macroscopic issues as a completely stalled fermentation.

To the possible causes:

- how did you oxigenate/aerate?
- did you use any sugar or unmalted adjuncts?
- any yeast nutrients?

 

[duncan.brown]

- how did you oxigenate/aerate?

90 seconds pure O2 through a stone at 1 liter/min.

- did you use any sugar or unmalted adjuncts?

No. All-grain mash with malted barley and some malted wheat. The wort fermentability was verified with a fast fermentation test using the same wort and yeast. That got down to 1.003, as measured with an FG hydrometer after de-gassing the sample.

- any yeast nutrients?

2.5g Wyeast Beer Yeast Nutrient in the boil.

 

[rhys333]

The differences between a starter and actual beer wort are way too small to be the root cause of such macroscopic issues as a completely stalled fermentation.

To the possible causes:

- how did you oxigenate/aerate?
- did you use any sugar or unmalted adjuncts?
- any yeast nutrients?

Speaking from first-hand experience, I can say with a high degree of confidence that this is incorrect.

 

[rhys333]

So, 3-4 generations and the colony has adapted to a specific fermenter configuration? This strain ought to be walking on land and eating insects by now.

One generation. Give it a try.

 

[Vale71]

Speaking from first-hand experience, I can say with a high degree of confidence that this is incorrect.

So you've done published research on the subject? Anecdotes and personal convictions do not count, of course.

 

[VikeMan]

One generation. Give it a try.

One generation is one budding (i.e. doubling). You typically get 3-4 generations in a batch.

Of course, if you pitch an a$$load of yeast cells from a previous fermentation, it's going to go faster.

But I don't need to give it a try. I've made dozens of batches with Wyeast 3724 and have never had a stall. I've certainly had some slow fermentations, which is fairly typical for the strain. Yeast nutrients, appropriate pitch rate, and oxygenation with pure O2 have yielded zero stalls for me. And no, I don't open ferment with it.

 

[Vale71]

Of course, if you pitch an a$$load of yeast cells from a previous fermentation, it's going to go faster.

Not necessarily, think high ABV beers for example. In the end the yeast will be so stressed out that you'd be much better off with a new starter at the appropriate pitch rate.
Anyway, the issue here is the "belief" that some saison strain is somehow "special" and will require special handling or a stall will invariably occur. Explanations for this alleged phenomen are abundant and all more or less inventive (read "nonsensical"). The fact that many brewers routinely use these strains without recourse to any special "tricks" and experience no issues at all is usually wilfully overlooked...

 

[VikeMan]

Not necessarily, think high ABV beers for example.

I'll amend my statement to "an a$$load of healthy yeast cells."

 

[rhys333]

So you've done published research on the subject? Anecdotes and personal convictions do not count, of course.

Unless you've done published work proving the contrary, I suggest taking your smarty pants off and giving it a go before delivering the truth. You could also pose questions about this observation to brewers on HBT in the form of a poll, or email Wyeast for clarification.

I tried this a few years ago on the advice of other brewers and it worked. The results have been repeated across multiple batches of the 3724 strain. Do I know the specific dynamics leading to this outcome? No. But I do know that first gen 3724, starter or no starter will usually stall. I also know thet second gen 3724, starter or no starter, ferments quickly without stalling.

 

[rhys333]

One generation is one budding (i.e. doubling). You typically get 3-4 generations in a batch.

Of course, if you pitch an a$$load of yeast cells from a previous fermentation, it's going to go faster.

But I don't need to give it a try. I've made dozens of batches with Wyeast 3724 and have never had a stall. I've certainly had some slow fermentations, which is fairly typical for the strain. Yeast nutrients, appropriate pitch rate, and oxygenation with pure O2 have yielded zero stalls for me. And no, I don't open ferment with it.

I don't open ferment either, and I pitch on the low end to promote new cell growth. First gen takes 6 to 8 weeks for me. Second gen takes just a few days.

 

[Vale71]

Unless you've done published work proving the contrary, I suggest taking your smarty pants off and giving it a go before delivering the truth. You could also pose questions about this observation to brewers on HBT in the form of a poll, or email Wyeast for clarification.

That's not how science works, sorry. You cannot say "I am right until someone proves me wrong", you have to provide proof for your assertions and anectodes or simple personal belief do not qualify as such. A poll would also prove nothing except that people will believe just about anything.
I also don't see why I should "give something a go" to fix an issue that is not there? Again, you're completely ignoring the brewers who report never having had any issues with this particular yeast strain.
BTW care to tell us what's the huge difference between starter wort and actual beer wort?

 

[Vale71]

I don't open ferment either, and I pitch on the low end to promote new cell growth.

Why don't you try not to underpitch and see if the problem goes away?

 

[Vale71]

Botched edit, disregard.

 

[rhys333]

That's not how science works, sorry. You cannot say "I am right until someone proves me wrong", you have to provide proof for your assertions and anectodes or simple personal belief do not qualify as such. A poll would also prove nothing except that people will believe just about anything.
I also don't see why I should "give something a go" to fix an issue that is not there? Again, you're completely ignoring the brewers who report never having had any issues with this particular yeast strain.
BTW care to tell us what's the huge difference between starter wort and actual beer wort?

The scientific method begins with observation. Then questions and research, forming of a hypothesis, testing, and so on. I have observed this process repeatedly, and with constency. That's good enough for me and many other brewers who have observed this, but you're demanding scientific evidence and published articles before I'm to be believed. Don't you think this is a bit much for making homebrewed beer? You could easily test my assertion and observe for yourself. You could research the experiences of others to find out if there's a pattern, but you say that's pointless. Isn't that an argument from ignorance logical fallacy?

Also, I'm not underpitching, and I'm not experiencing problems other than slower than average fermetation on the first generation. This is typical for many if not the vast majority of brewers. I'm curious... are your 3724 beers fermenting as fast as other yeast strains? My gen 1 takes about 6 weeks. Gen 2 and on, perhaps 3-4 days.

 

[duncan.brown]

The scientific method begins with observation. Then questions and research, forming of a hypothesis, testing, and so on. I have observed this process repeatedly, and with constency.

Yes, I would concur that given the data I presented, you (and others in this thread) have made the observation that the first ferment with 3724 can be slow so what I am seeing is not an anomaly. My fast fermentation test demonstrates that the pitched yeast was healthy enough to drop 250 ml of wort from 1.056 to 1.003 in 72 hours. No problem with the fermentability of the wort.

You've also given me a well-posed and testable hypothesis: the rate of conversion of fermentable sugar to alcohol will proceed more quickly with subsequent generations of 3724. The arguments you made (adaption of the yeast from pure culture to the wort) are consistent with the published literature on yeast physiology, so the hypothesis can't simply be dismissed as one not worth testing.

There's also a valid hypothesis that letting the temperature drop from 80F to 70F during the first 48 hours of fermentation has caused the fermentation to slow down and that if I had kept it at 80F (or increased it), then fermentation would have proceeded more quickly. Again, this hypothesis is consistent with published literature on yeast physiology and Wyeast's description of this yeast strain, and it is worth testing.

I'm convinced enough to do experiments to test these two hypotheses. I'd call that a reasonable application of the scientific method. I'll report my method and findings back here.

I did search the MBAA archives for any discussion of slow ferments in saison strains, but couldn't find anything. However, there is plenty of literature about how yeast adapts to its environment and then carries this adaption to subsequent batches. This can be both desirable and undesirable, depending on the strain and the beer. There are lots of papers on the STA1 gene in 3724 and its cousins, though, for obvious reasons.

 

[VikeMan]

You've also given me a well-posed and testable hypothesis: the rate of conversion of fermentable sugar to alcohol will proceed more quickly with subsequent generations of 3724.

Be sure to use the same pitch rate and fermentation temperature profile.

 

[Kenmoron]

There is some thought that these STA1 positive strains may be more oxygen-sensitive (need a bit more oxygen). Legend has it that the Dupont strain stalls because of the pressure produced by the airlock...but the amount of pressure that this produces is extremely negligible. If this were the case, a weather storm would cause this yeast to stall due to pressure changes...hard to believe. I don't have the tests or data to back this up, but my guess is that the claims of having better experience with open fermentation on 1st generation Dupont are more likely due to additional oxygen ingress during fermentation. If I had a stall, I would try to agitate the fermenter, warm it up a bit, and perhaps add a bit of oxygen as long as there is still quite a bit left to ferment.

 

[duncan.brown]

Be sure to use the same pitch rate.

Yes, I will. I will probably get a cheap haemocytometer to do cell counts. It's been on the list for a while.

 

[VikeMan]

Legend has it that the Dupont strain stalls because of the pressure produced by the airlock...but the amount of pressure that this produces is extremely negligible.

Approx 1/400 of an atmosphere, according to one physicist I trust. IOW, less than random fluctuations.

If this were the case, a weather storm would cause this yeast to stall due to pressure changes...hard to believe.

Virtually impossible to believe, IMO. Particularly when you consider the strain easily carbonates up to 4-ish volumes of CO2 (a la Saison Dupont), ramping up to more than 50 PSI near the end.

 

[duncan.brown]

Legend has it that the Dupont strain stalls because of the pressure produced by the airlock...but the amount of pressure that this produces is extremely negligible. If this were the case, a weather storm would cause this yeast to stall due to pressure changes...hard to believe.

Yeah, the pressure hypothesis is one that I find hard to believe based on some simple math. The pressure from 2" of water is 0.07 psi or about 4 millibars. The atmospheric pressure has changed by more than that in Syracuse over the last 48 hours.

I have the heat belt on the fermenter now to bring it back to 80F. Let's see what happens.

 

[Vale71]

If I had a stall, I would try to agitate the fermenter, warm it up a bit, and perhaps add a bit of oxygen as long as there is still quite a bit left to ferment.

You might as well dump the batch right away as any oxygen you might introduce once fermentation is under way won't fix any issues you're having with it and will completely ruin your beer before it's even fully fermented.
Truth is there is no observable difference between fermenting with and without an airlock. Those who swear they've observed it are actually just perpetuating an urban legend.

 

[Vale71]

The arguments you made (adaption of the yeast from pure culture to the wort) are consistent with the published literature on yeast physiology, so the hypothesis can't simply be dismissed as one not worth testing.

Actually the argument he made is that the yeast has to adapt to your "brew setup". He then made it pretty clear that he has no idea what that actually means.

 

[Kenmoron]

You might as well dump the batch right away as any oxygen you might introduce once fermentation is under way won't fix any issues you're having with it and will completely ruin your beer before it's even fully fermented.

If this were the case, open fermentation would not be a thing. You might have a hard time convincing Anchor Brewing, Sam Smith, Schneider Weisse, among others.

 

[duncan.brown]

When I started this thread I didn't expect it to be quite so controversial! My take aways are:

• My data shows that my 3724 has slowed. It's still slow. Letting the temperature drop seems to be the one thing that's been pointed to in my process that could be a culprit for this.
• Pitches of subsequent generations at the similar pitch rates have been observed to be less prone to slow down, which is testable.
• Sensitivity to airlock pressure is likely a myth as the pressure caused by an airlock is less than atmospheric variations.

If this were the case, open fermentation would not be a thing. You might have a hard time convincing Anchor Brewing, Sam Smith, Schneider Weisse, among others.

Or Vinnie Cilurzo at Russian River, Dan Carey at New Glarus, or a several generations of English brewers.

I originally left the ferment open as I thought this might be a yeast that likes more gas exchange in the headspace (like 1469). I found some pictures of Brasserie Dupont fermenters. I can't tell for sure, but they look to me like closed vessels.

 

[Qhrumphf]

If this were the case, open fermentation would not be a thing. You might have a hard time convincing Anchor Brewing, Sam Smith, Schneider Weisse, among others.

This.

I've tried a second blast of oxygen into fermentation (no later than 24 hrs) in two circumstances. VERY strong beers (15% ABV or so). And lagers, if the pitching rate is less than ideal, though I don't do that unless I have no choice. In both cases, beer definitely isn't ruined.

I've been curious to try it with Dupont as well. FWIW I've never had that yeast stall on me, and it's always closed fermentation. But it does take a lot longer than other yeasts to fully attenuate (by which I mean 3 weeks and not 8 weeks). And long time at elevated temps has left me with occasional autolytic characters i haven't been happy with (which I why I started using blended strains instead)

Curious if the STA1 enzymatic secretion being enhanced by oxygen theory holds water, and that second blast of oxygen could mean either ability to reduce the temp or to reduce the time at elevated temp.

 

[Kenmoron]

I've tried a second blast of oxygen into fermentation (no later than 24 hrs) in two circumstances. VERY strong beers (15% ABV or so).

I've done the same in a 14.5% barleywine...definitely didn't ruin it. (not a grand master like yourself but am certified)

 

[rhys333]

Actually the argument he made is that the yeast has to adapt to your "brew setup". He then made it pretty clear that he has no idea what that actually means.

Why would I fret over the details when it's problem solved?