Brett Trois contains no Brett

[SourBrewer]

Omega Yeast Labs FB:

"An update to our recent post regarding our Brettanomyces blends. We enlisted the services of Charles River Laboratories to conclusively identify the "Brettanomyces bruxellensis Trois" component of the blends. The results have come in and shown that indeed, this strain is Saccharomyces cerevisiae, and not Brettanomyces as originally thought. The report we received from Charles River shows an identification confidence to the species level. Our goal from the beginning was not to create controversy, but to accurately label our products. We had early suspicions that this strain may not be accurately classified because it did not perform like other Brett strains we had worked with so we followed up on those hunches. This has no bearing on the beers that this strain makes. We like it, which is why we use it ourselves and market products containing that strain. On the bright side, people afraid of introducing Brett into their breweries should be able to use this strain with no fear and enjoy the results it provides. Thank you for your patience and understanding with this matter."

So many 100% Brett IPAs are just IPAs.

 

[quirkzoo1]

I wonder what the ramifications will be for competitions and submission of "brett" beers that no longer have any brettanomyces in them.

 

[RyanG1]

What!?!

 

[tehzachatak]

Omega Yeast Labs FB:

"An update to our recent post regarding our Brettanomyces blends. We enlisted the services of Charles River Laboratories to conclusively identify the "Brettanomyces bruxellensis Trois" component of the blends. The results have come in and shown that indeed, this strain is Saccharomyces cerevisiae, and not Brettanomyces as originally thought. The report we received from Charles River shows an identification confidence to the species level. Our goal from the beginning was not to create controversy, but to accurately label our products. We had early suspicions that this strain may not be accurately classified because it did not perform like other Brett strains we had worked with so we followed up on those hunches. This has no bearing on the beers that this strain makes. We like it, which is why we use it ourselves and market products containing that strain. On the bright side, people afraid of introducing Brett into their breweries should be able to use this strain with no fear and enjoy the results it provides. Thank you for your patience and understanding with this matter."

So many 100% Brett IPAs are just IPAs.

Wait - I'm a little confused. Is this saying the entire strain isn't brett, i.e. Brett trois doesn't exist? Or just this lab's Brett blends. Or is this lab the only provider of brett trois?

EDIT: Looks like from the reading I've done (good writeup at embrace the funk among other places), that it's the whole strain. Interesting!

 

[SourBrewer]

Wait - I'm a little confused. Is this saying the entire strain isn't brett, i.e. Brett trois doesn't exist? Or just this lab's Brett blends. Or is this lab the only provider of brett trois?

Yeast drama. Omega Labs is saying White Labs classified it wrong as Brett brux var Trois. Brett Trois/Drie is really a Saccharomyces.

Brett Trois originated from BSI Drie, which was harvested from J & J Blauw for Avery 15 by BSI. Chad Y found that BSI Drie was actually 2 strains during the Brett Project and he isolated the "Drie" strain that is now marketed as Brett Trois by White Labs.

 

[csano]

Omega Yeast Labs FB:

"An update to our recent post regarding our Brettanomyces blends. We enlisted the services of Charles River Laboratories to conclusively identify the "Brettanomyces bruxellensis Trois" component of the blends. The results have come in and shown that indeed, this strain is Saccharomyces cerevisiae, and not Brettanomyces as originally thought. The report we received from Charles River shows an identification confidence to the species level. Our goal from the beginning was not to create controversy, but to accurately label our products. We had early suspicions that this strain may not be accurately classified because it did not perform like other Brett strains we had worked with so we followed up on those hunches. This has no bearing on the beers that this strain makes. We like it, which is why we use it ourselves and market products containing that strain. On the bright side, people afraid of introducing Brett into their breweries should be able to use this strain with no fear and enjoy the results it provides. Thank you for your patience and understanding with this matter."

So many 100% Brett IPAs are just IPAs.

I'm confused. If I've been saying that I don't like IPAs unless they're Brett IPAs, does that mean I've liked IPAs all along?

 

[stupac2]

So many 100% Brett IPAs are just IPAs.

How many? How long has this strain been in use?

 

[SourBrewer]

I'm confused. If I've been saying that I don't like IPAs unless they're Brett IPAs, does that mean I've liked IPAs all along?

Yes

 

[SourBrewer]

How many? How long has this strain been in use?

Avery 15 was April 2008. I think BSI started selling it as Brett Brux var Drie soon after. White Labs started selling it around July 2012.

 

[LukeAleTime]

Some more info:

http://embracethefunk.com/2014/12/11/brettanomyces/

 

[SourBrewer]

 

[SourBrewer]

Brett is not the father.

 

[blckout201]

 

[degardebrewing]

How many? How long has this strain been in use?

At this point, I'd go with 'most.'

 

[stupac2]

At this point, I'd go with 'most.'

Well, that's pretty funny then.

Why did this throw people off for so long? I know that differentiating between microbes is a herculean (and to some extent sisyphean) task, but these are two pretty well-studied organisms. Is this just the first time someone ran it through a PCR?

 

[degardebrewing]

Well, that's pretty funny then.

Why did this throw people off for so long? I know that differentiating between microbes is a herculean (and to some extent sisyphean) task, but these are two pretty well-studied organisms. Is this just the first time someone ran it through a PCR?

Definitive definition is hard.
I think the lack of early skepticism is amazing.
Edit: And the yeast gave the desired fruity outcome, so that minimized incentive for the breweries using to question it, or do even a minimal analysis.

 

[tehzachatak]

Well, that's pretty funny then.

Why did this throw people off for so long? I know that differentiating between microbes is a herculean (and to some extent sisyphean) task, but these are two pretty well-studied organisms. Is this just the first time someone ran it through a PCR?

It's pretty weird. Chad studied this isolate specifically, because IIRC it was originally sold as one strain before he figured out there were multiple in whatever isolate was being sold, and isolated brett trois specifically. I don't know anything about microbiology, but seems odd he was able to realize there were multiple organisms in whatever original sample he was studying, and isolated this one out specifically, yet didn't realize it wasn't brett.

 

[CruisaC]

Ummm, I majored in microbiology and

Ok so I do a little bit but still yeasts seem hard.

 

[Sage1]

Is this just the first time someone ran it through a PCR?

From Chad’s dissertation: “Additionally Michael Pearson at the University of California Santa Cruz conducted PCR identification sequencing based on polymorphism in the rRNA internal transcribed spacer region. Pearson identified both strains as B. bruxellensis.”

 

[stupac2]

From Chad’s dissertation: “Additionally Michael Pearson at the University of California Santa Cruz conducted PCR identification sequencing based on polymorphism in the rRNA internal transcribed spacer region. Pearson identified both strains as B. bruxellensis.”

This saga has more twists than an M Night Shamalamadingdong movie.

Could that have just been contamination? Chad sent the wrong sample? What is going on here?

 

[Snarf1]

I don't think White Labs Trois or ECY03B were the samples. I think what that guy is selling as those strains were sampled, not what White Labs or ECY sells.

 

[SourBrewer]

With all this talk of yeast genetics, I read a few things about WY3711 French Saison/Danstar Belle Saison being Sacch. cerv. var. Diastaticus and it's ability to ferment dextrins. I also read that they have been finding var. Diastaticus in Brazilian cassava flour factories. I think I will try isolating yeaat from some Goya cassava flour in a search for Brazilian saison strains.

 

[BusinessSloth]

Can I get a TL;DR? How about an ELI5?

No?

Ok a handy will do then.

 

[SourBrewer]

Can I get a TL;DR? How about an ELI5?

No?

Ok a handy will do then.

Most Brett IPAs are just IPAs.

Thanks Obama

 

[BusinessSloth]

Most Brett IPAs are just IPAs.

Thanks Obama

Damn... Well that aside, this was still pretty f-ing good when I had a can or two.

 

[jtmartino1]

From Chad’s dissertation: “Additionally Michael Pearson at the University of California Santa Cruz conducted PCR identification sequencing based on polymorphism in the rRNA internal transcribed spacer region. Pearson identified both strains as B. bruxellensis.”

At first I thought:

But then:

http://reactiongifs.me/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/black-dynamite-you-done-****ed-up-now.gif

 

[ncaudle]

from the reading I've done over the past couple weeks since this erupted in Milk The Funk, only Trois has been determined to not be brett. the users who've done the genetic mapping and testing all say that Drie is still in fact brett.

 

[Sage1]

http://www.whitelabs.com/files/644_Explanation.pdf

 

[drgarage1]

"WLP644 is now Saccharomyces brux-like Trois (formerly known as Bre,anomyces bruxellensis Trois)."

----

Strong name. Confident name. I will say, as a home brewer, that white labs brett pitches have been uniformly disappointing relative to other providers. Wyeast, on the other hand, kills it with their brett.

And ECY is the gold standard for wild pitches, of course.