Some of you may be aware of the blog/website Drew and I have at www.experimentalbrew.com. we have been joined by a gentleman who goes by S. Cerevisiae who has a wealth of info about yeast…some of it kinda controversial. Read what he has to say at http://www.experimentalbrew.com/blogs/s … ar-weapons
Great information, Denny. Thank you. This article prompted me to try a couple different things with my yeast starter last week. If yeast counts double every 90 minutes, then that means even if I kill half my yeast by failing to properly rehydrate it first, I’ll be back to my original yeast count in only 90 minutes, correct? This time, I was planning two batches with US-05. I figured if I gave yeast starter a few extra days to really build up the yeast count (i usually start the yeast starter 3 days before brew day but went 6 this time), I would just split it and pitch half the starter in each batch. I had airlock activity in 4 hours and had to switch to blow-off tubes (even with 6 gallon primaries) by 12 hours. This is compared to a rehydrated packet of yeast on brew day that I typically see no activity for 16 to 24 hours. I know this is not using the scientific method as I wasn’t doing 2 identical batches with one pitched with rehydrated yeast and one with a starter, but it does support the idea that you can get a shorter lag time even with a dry yeast starter. I also think rehydrating yeast is a waste of time. Besides, if I kill the weaker yeast cells by failing to rehydrate and aggressively propogate the strong ones in a starter, didn’t I just invoke Darwinism and have a healthier and stronger population of yeast going into the wort? Thoughts?
