Lager Yeast in IPAs

I believe that lager yeast is actually a hybrid strain between ale yeast and a wild South American strain that made it's way into Europe during the 16th or 17th century.

 

Probably so. I’ve only ever brewed a few batches of beer, and that was 30-odd years ago and limited to ales, so it’s probably just that I did see these as more distinct than they really are. But I think the fault lies with the terminology we use, because all or most beer is classified as either ale or lager and there doesn’t seem to be much gray area between the two in terms of how we talk about them or categorize them.

 

No, fresh hop season isn’t for 2 or 3 more months. We see the first ones in late August and then the season runs through October or early November.

 

Or, after the initial simplification, complicate things beyond recognition. At least in the US, "IPA" once essentially meant something like Ballantine IPA, a deep amber malt body with a strong hop flavor and lasting bitterness. (even though it was almost certainly brewed with lager yeast during the later years of S&P/Falstaff ownership). Now what?

 

We’ve all been living a lie

 

Chico yeast is so clean that a lot of people that it was actually a larger yeast, that turned out to be untrue, but I can’t imagine that by the time you hop the shit out of the wort for an IPA that most consumers could not tell the difference between an IPA brewed with Chico versus a true lager yeast.

 

Yeah, I grew up in that (pre-craft beer) era and still have to think twice sometimes when people phrase a question the "wrong" way.


Not yet discussed (unless I missed it) is that even in the early post-Repeal era period, some in the industry still defined "Lager" as "Beer that has been aged for at least three months in casks or barrels," which, of course, would eliminate most US craft and macro (so-called) lagers.

And many once (and some still) consider Steam Beer a "hybrid" style, since it was fermented with lager yeast at warm temperatures with no lagering period.

 

One thing that I learned a year or two ago from reading Shut Up About Barclay Perkins is that Germans do not consider top fermenting beers to be Ales, but “top fermented lagerbier.”

I’m sure everyone here knows that lager means “to store”; so any beer with a long cold conditioning is considered a lager in Germany regardless if the yeast works or the top or bottom of the tank.

 

Yes, lager yeast is a hybrid:

“Lager yeast (Saccharomyces pastorianus)

Compared to the ancient species of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Saccharomyces pastorianus is a relatively modern species.

Nobody really knows when lager yeast first ‘happened’ but it is commonly described as being sometime in the 1400’s with lager beers being produced in Central Europe (e.g., present day Germany/Czech Republic).

Genetic studies reveal that lager yeast (Saccharomyces pastorianus) is a hybrid of Saccharomyces cerevisiae (ale yeast) and Saccharomyces eubayanus.

A number of years ago they discovered Saccharomyces eubayanus in the forests of Patagonia (South America). So some folks opined that this was the source for creating the hybrid Saccharomyces pastorianus. But how the heck did this yeast get from Patagonia to Central Europe over 500 years ago. Christopher Columbus did not arrive to the New World until 1492. I am not aware that there was any trading between South America and Europe before then.

Now, Saccharomyces eubayanus exists in other parts of the world (e.g., China) and there has been regular commerce between Europe and China since the times of Marco Polo (13th century). Maybe some yeast ‘hitchhiked’ on some trading goods?

Below is from an Abstract from a technical paper published in 2019:

“Our genome analysis together with previous reports in the sister species S. uvarum strongly suggests that the S. eubayanus ancestor could have originated in Patagonia or the Southern Hemisphere, rather than China, yet further studies are needed to resolve this conflicting scenario. Understanding S. eubayanus evolutionary history is crucial to resolve the unknown origin of the lager yeast and might open new avenues for biotechnological applications.”

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/709253v1

Perhaps with further genetic studies we will learn more here.”

https://www.morebeer.com/articles/Fermenting_beer

Cheers!

 

That's not clear. While the Ballantine XXX Ale may have been brewed at other Falstaff (and General) plants, the India Pale Ale, being a much smaller brand, went from Cranston to Ft Wayne and then, from around 1991-1996* to Milwaukee (S&P had bought Pabst in the 80s *Milwaukee closed in 1996).

Probably because it was such a limited product being brewed in a huge multi-million barrel brewery, Pabst revived Old Tankard Ale at the same time. Pabst PR stated:

"True ale" was sometimes used as brewery-lingo shorthand for a true top-fermented ale (like in the Harvard text in the image above), rather than a bastard ale --- but it's a vague enough phrase to not be sure.

 

I never thought I could tell the difference between beers brewed with ale yeast vs. lager yeast. Maybe, if identical worts were fermented and aged identically, a blind taste test might do it.

 

Kölsch and Altbier, yes. Not Weizen -- which is top-fermented, but uses a proprietary yeast that no one would use in an ESB or IPA.

Then again -- innovation rules, right?

 

These us to be called IPL's, India Pale Lagers...its an all around shrug for me. Doesn't have the intense punch of really good IPA's, and doesn't have the "I'm going to keep drinking this in big gulps" feel like a good crisp and clean lager does for me. They are like a bland "prog rock" band to me, give me a good rock band or a good jazz band. Stop straddling the line.

Unless you are one of the truly good hybrids, like Steam Beer...or good prog like King Crimson ha.

 

Jack's Abby Hoponius Union used to be labeled as an IPL:



At some point the marketing folks changed the labeling but still retained "Lager":



Cheers!

@speakorspasm

 

Yep, I remember when that came out. Only had a few times, cause I can't get it locally. Though remember being one of the few that I did really enjoy from the so called "IPL" style. Since I haven't had it in a while, was unaware of the label change.

 

So is there an actual difference between an "IPL" and "Cold IPA"? I asked a local brewer, when I saw a Cold IPA on tap recently, he said it was just a hoppy lager, which is just not helpful

 

Take what I have to say in context with what I thought I knew about yeast strains, ales, lagers etc.—but I always thought cold IPAs and IPLs were synonymous. And I’ve enjoyed the ones I’ve had. They combine the hoppy character of IPAs with the “clean, crisp” character of lagers. But WTF do I know

 

I remember seeing some thread on here that started with an article about the difference between IPLs and Cold IPAs. Basically, an IPL is an IPA brewed with lager yeast, and a Cold IPA is a lager hopped to IPA levels, utilizing adjuncts to make it cleaner. Even though using adjuncts to make DIPAs cleaner has been around for a long, long time now. Basically, the Coors Light of the IPA family. This is all different from Brut IPAs, which use an ale yeast, adjuncts, and enzymes to create a very dry, clean beer.

More than one way to skin a cat, I guess, but it's all just marketing once it escapes the cage.