13,703
edits
Changes
Hops
,→The Freshening Power of the Hop (Hop Creep)
Kirkpatrick and Shellhammer (2018) also reported that the exposure time of the beer to the dry hop material played a significant role in the breakdown of dextrins. Most of the breakdown of dextrins occurs within 5 days (+0.7% ABV), but continued slowly up until at least 40 days (+1.3%). They also tested removing the hops via centrifuge and storing the beer at 10°C or 20°C. Their results suggested that the effect of the enzymatic breakdown of dextrins by hops appears to only be active when in contact with the hops and that once the beer is removed then this breakdown of dextrins stops. The authors suggest that to avoid as much breakdown of starches and over-attenuation from dry hops as possible, brewers can limit the amount of time sits on the hops and reduce the temperature, however, it is also important to consider how this might impact the product's flavor and careful measures should be taken to balance the over-attenuation problem and overall beer quality <ref name="Kirkpatrick_2018" />. After removing the beer from the hops, a second diacetyl rest has been suggested as a way to clean up any diacetyl or off-flavors that the yeast produces from the additional fermentation during dry hopping <ref>[https://www.rockstarbrewer.com/how-dry-hop-creep-causes-diacetyl-in-beer-and-how-brewers-can-minimise-the-risk/ STEVE 'HENDO' HENDERSON. How “Dry Hop Creep” Causes Diacetyl In Beer and How Brewers Can Minimise The Risk. Rockstar Brewer Academy website. 09/03/2018. Retrieved 10/05/2018.]</ref>. Other recommended solutions to avoiding hop creep is pasteurizing, filtering, or cold crashing out the yeast before dry hopping, storing the beer cold so that the yeast remains inactive, reducing dry hopping amounts, and dry hopping before fermentation is finished <ref>[http://beersmith.com/blog/2019/03/31/dry-hop-creep-over-carbonation-and-diacetyl-in-beer/ Brad Smith. BeerSmith blog. 03/13/2019. Retrieved 07/23/2019.]</ref>.
[https://www.mbaa.com/publications/tq/tqPastIssues/2021/Pages/TQ-58-3-0705-01.aspx Teraoka et al. (2021)] argued that enzymes present in dry hops are not derived from the hops hop plants themselves, but microbes living on the hops and that the reported variability of starch degrading enzymes present in hops is due to the varying environmental conditions created by drying hops that encourage or discourage microbial growth. It has been reported that proteobacteria are the dominant type of bacteria that grow on hops, with the majority of them being Pseudomonas and Sphingomonas, with Pseudomonas having being previously reported to produce alpha-amylase. However, the authors recommend that further research is needed to identify which microbe species might be producing these enzymes on hops. They found that hops treated with the anti-microbial chemical sodium azide resulted in hops with much lower starch degrading enzymes. They also reported that alpha-amylase decreased in dried leaf and pellet hops over 3 months of anaerobic storage (storage temperature did play a role in the degradation rate of the enzymes). Alpha-amylase stayed relative consistent in fresh hops during storage. Beta-amylase remained stable over the three month storage time regardless of hop type. The authors also acknowledge another possible variable being that hop seed material might contain starch; however, seeded hops are generally not used in the brewing industry <ref>[https://www.mbaa.com/publications/tq/tqPastIssues/2021/Pages/TQ-58-3-0705-01.aspx "Do Starch-Degrading Enzymes in Hop Samples Originate in Microorganisms?" Ryohei Teraoka (1), Makoto Kanauchi (1), and Charles W. Bamforth (2). 1. Department of Food Management, Miyagi University, Hatatate Taihaku-ku Sendai Miyagi, 982-0215, Japan. 2. Sierra Nevada Brewing Company, Chico, CA 95928, U.S.A.]</ref>.
[https://www.mdpi.com/2311-5637/7/2/66/html Bruner et al (2021)] investigated whether or not yeast strain selection has an impact on hop creep with the goal of finding if any strains would reduce the potential for dry-hop creep. They examined 30 different ''Saccharomyces'' yeasts from different yeast labs, and measured the [https://beerandbrewing.com/dictionary/gaKDNn0yxE/ real degrees of fermentation (RDF)] that occurred after dry-hopping post fermentation. With the exception of two strains, all of the yeasts re-fermented the beer after dry hopping, indicating that yeast strain selection won't reduce the chances for dry hop creep. There were two exceptions to this. The first was a diastatic strain of ''Saccharomyces cerevisiae'' (SafAle™ BE-134), which was able to break down starches in the beer prior to dry hopping due to the [[Saccharomyces#Diastatic_strains_of_Saccharomyces_cerevisiae|diastatic properties]] of this yeast strain. The other exception was a strain of ''Saccharomyces mikatae'' that is used as a co-fermenter in wine fermentations and is a poor attenuater of wort. The study also found no correlation between flocculation and attenuation from dry-hop creep, but suggested that further research be done to investigate the belief that higher flocculating strains could reduce the negative effects of dry hop creep <ref>[https://www.mdpi.com/2311-5637/7/2/66/html Bruner J, Marcus A, Fox G. Dry-Hop Creep Potential of Various Saccharomyces Yeast Species and Strains. Fermentation. 2021; 7(2):66. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation7020066.]</ref>.