H2S development during bottle fermentation - Lalvin 71b vs. EC1118

[Søren Ugilt Larsen]

Hello,

Although H2S development in cider has been discussed frequently in this forum, some issues are still puzzling me - hence another post on this:)

I generally do wild fermentation of cider (from dessert apple varieties with relatively high acidity) without any initial SO2 addition, and quite often there is a strong taint of H2S during the fermentation. In most cases, the taint disappears after fermentation has finished or after some storage - so not a problem. In some cases, it the taint seems to persist very long (for a year or even longer), and although I have not yet been very successful in removing H2S by splash racking, I understand that it may also be done by use of copper (have not tried this yet). 

However, my issue now is about formation of H2S after bottling. Previously, my general procedure at bottling has been the following: When the cider is ready for bottling (i.e. clear, without H2S taint etc.), I add sugar to a density of 1.006 and dispense a little bit of the champagne yeast EC1118 to ensure in-bottle fermentation (perhaps not always necessary - but sometimes the carbonation has been to poor without adding yeast). Unfortunately, I have not weighed the dose of yeast due to lack of a decent balance. Normally, I have not added any nutrients along with the yeast, and in some cases I have added 25-50 ppm SO2. This procedure has rarely if ever resulted in H2S after in-bottle fermentation. 

For some of the cider batches from harvest 2022, I have replaced the EC1118 yeast with the Lalvin 71b yeast at bottling. The reason for changing was that EC1118 is reported to ferment very much to dryness, but also because I hoped for some reduction in malic acid by the 71b (don't know if this is realistic during bottle fermentation?). 

I have applied the Lalvin 71b at a dose ranging between 0.2 and 1.1 g yeast per 10 L (which is a considerably higher than the dose I used of EC1118) and most often without adding nutrients. For three out of five batches with this procedure, some H2S taint has developed during bottle fermentation - which is of course rather annoying. 

I am now wondering:

- Could Lalvin 71b be more prone to produce H2S than EC1118 within the conditions described?

- Could the H2S be due to a too high dose of 71b and/or lack of added nutrients?

- Would the risk of H2S be diminished if not adding cultured yeast at bottling at all? (and hoping for enough viable yeast to produce carbonation)

Comments are most welcome.

Best wishes

Søren

[Claude Jolicoeur]

Le dimanche 19 mars 2023 à 07:37:48 UTC-4, Søren Ugilt Larsen a écrit :

I am now wondering:

- Could Lalvin 71b be more prone to produce H2S than EC1118 within the conditions described?

- Could the H2S be due to a too high dose of 71b and/or lack of added nutrients?

- Would the risk of H2S be diminished if not adding cultured yeast at bottling at all? (and hoping for enough viable yeast to produce carbonation)

I would think #2 is the most likely. You say you have used between 0.2 and 1.1g of yeast per 10L - Are the 3 batches that developed the taint those with higher yeast dosage (i.e. closer to 1.1g than to 0.2g)?

[mannp...@gmail.com]

I can't really answer your questions, but some things to consider:

- 71B is quite temperature sensitive. It won't start at lower temperatures.

- You will not get any useful reduction of malic from the small amount of fermentation that occurs in bottle.

[luis.ga...@gmail.com]

If your reason for changing from EC1118 to 71B is to keep some residual sweetness, I doubt ths will work because 100 % of the remaining sugars are fermentable. I also don't think that you can achieve a noticeable malic acid reduction via bottle conditionning. A complete fermentation with 71B compared to EC1118 might give a higer residual sweetness sensation via malic acid reduction (even if both ciders a dry).

I'd stick to EC1118 for bottle conditionning if you have more consistent result with it.

Louis

Le dimanche 19 mars 2023 à 07:37:48 UTC-4, Søren Ugilt Larsen a écrit :

[Søren Ugilt Larsen]

Thanks a lot for your comments.

For the three batches, I have used doses of 0.2, 0.3 and 1.1 g Lalvin 71b per 10 L for the bottle fermentation, and as far as I recall, the H2S taint was stronger for the batch with the highest dose. So it could be a matter of too high dose. I am still below the recommended dose for Lalvin 71b for wine production which is 2.5 g per 10 L (for the main fermentation) according to the product sheet, but the product sheet also recommends to use a nitrogen source. Would you generally recommend to apply nutrients along with the yeast for bottle fermentation? And do you have recommendations for doses of yeast for the bottle fermentation?

Anyway, since two of you suggest that I may not obtain any significant reduction in malic acid during bottle fermentation with 71b, I may follow the advice on sticking to the EC1118 for pitching for bottle fermentation. 

Best wishes

Søren

[Claude Jolicoeur]

When I add yeast at bottling, I generally use between 10 and 20 ppm of dry yeast, which, for 10 L, makes 0.1 to 0.2g depending on if I want petillant or fully sparkling. I can use EC1118 or 71B (whichever open package I have) and, as far as I can tell, it doesn't make any real difference.

I can also add some nutrients (DAP), but when I do so, I reduce the quantity of yeast. We know DAP is 21% N, while dry yeast is approximately 10% N in weight. Hence, adding 1g of DAP is approximately equivalent to adding 2g of dry yeast.

For example, all of these would be roughly equivalent in terms of N addition, and should produce a nice sparkle while leaving a minimal amount of sediment:

20ppm of yeast and no DAP

10ppm of DAP and no yeast (only if there are still some minimal amoung of viable yeast in the cider)

10ppm of yeast and 5 ppm of DAP

And, PS, I never had H2S taint during bottle conditioning in over 30 years of cider making...

[Ray Blockley]

Following this thread with great interest - and thanks to all - after having some bottled ciders with quite heavy sediments last year; & also after experimenting with EC1118, 71B & also QA23 yeasts for fermentation & also as an addition to get a sparkle when bottling; most of my main bulk ferments are "no added yeast" (ie: wild, feral, whatever).
I tend to follow the route of adding a yeast plus a small amount of DAP to ensure a sparkle (been caught out previously so now add both). 
As someone who struggles working out PPM & goes by grammes per litre, I notice the flip between & use of both?
So from the posts by Claude & Soren, am I reading correctly that 0.1g yeast per 10L is equivalent to 10ppm...?     
I just want to be sure I'm reading it correctly, so apologies if my query is "questioning the obvious". 
I've only really been bottling in bulk (500ml & 750ml) over the last 3 years & have never had problems with H2S either, so I'm hopefully doing something right. 

 

Thanks & Best Wishes, 
Ray. 

--
--
Visit our website: http://www.ciderworkshop.com
 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "Cider Workshop" Google Group.
By joining the Cider Workshop, you agree to abide by our principles. Please see http://www.ciderworkshop.com/resources_principles.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cider Workshop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cider-worksho...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cider-workshop/553911ee-1213-46b9-a211-45a8543ea7d9n%40googlegroups.com.

[Claude Jolicoeur]

Le mardi 21 mars 2023 à 05:55:11 UTC-4, Ray Blockley a écrit :

So from the posts by Claude & Soren, am I reading correctly that 0.1g yeast per 10L is equivalent to 10ppm...?     

Yes, assuming 10L is 10 000g

0.1g in 10 000g

is same as 1g in 100 000g

and as 10g in 1 000 000g, hence 10 in one million, which makes 10 ppm.

[Ray Blockley]

Thanks for the clarification. 

Ray

--

--
Visit our website: http://www.ciderworkshop.com
 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "Cider Workshop" Google Group.
By joining the Cider Workshop, you agree to abide by our principles. Please see http://www.ciderworkshop.com/resources_principles.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cider Workshop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cider-worksho...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cider-workshop/d52697a5-915a-4fb2-87cd-2c17bd4ef258n%40googlegroups.com.

[Søren Ugilt Larsen]

Thank you very much, Claude and Ray. Very useful guidelines for adding just enough to get sparkly and apparently with very low risk of H2S taint. 

As nutrient source, I use Nutrivit, which contains DAP but also other ingedients

(https://brouwland.com/en/index.php?controller=attachment&id_attachment=7637&filename=Food+Safety+and+Quality+Certificate.pdf). I have not found data on the N content in this product, but perhaps this may also be around 21%?

Claude, I suppose your dose-response relation for N dose and resulting sparkle applies to cider where yeast or N for yeast growth is the primary limiting factor. But how does the content of fermentable sugar interact with this?

From experience, I have settled on adding sugar to a SG of 1.006, since this normally gives an adequate and reliable carbonation in ciders, that have fermented to complete dryness (generally from nutrient rich apples and with or without keeving). 

I have thought that the degree of carbonation was primarily determined by the sugar quantity, but perhaps only in nutrient rich cider?

Do you also take the fermentation speed into consideration when you decide the dose of yeast/nutrients at bottling?

One last question: Will you be in Denmark on your Europe tour in April? 😊

Best wishes Søren

[Claude Jolicoeur]

Le mardi 21 mars 2023 à 17:08:08 UTC-4, Søren Ugilt Larsen a écrit :

As nutrient source, I use Nutrivit, which contains DAP but also other ingedients

(https://brouwland.com/en/index.php?controller=attachment&id_attachment=7637&filename=Food+Safety+and+Quality+Certificate.pdf). I have not found data on the N content in this product, but perhaps this may also be around 21%?

Hard to say - I don't know this product. Maybe you can ask Brouwland?

 

Claude, I suppose your dose-response relation for N dose and resulting sparkle applies to cider where yeast or N for yeast growth is the primary limiting factor. But how does the content of fermentable sugar interact with this?

I find the actual content of fermentable sugar doesn't change the amount of sparkle (as long as there is enough sugar evidently). For example, in my own process, I usually bottle when the cider is at a SG of around 1.012, and perfectly stabilized and clarified - thus indicating the nutrients are exhausted and there is negligible yeast activity remaining. At that point, adding a mixed dosage of DAP and dried yeast as mentioned in previous post is just enough to drop the SG by about 4 points and yield a finished cider nicely sparkling and off-dry at a SG of about 1.008 (for about 15 g/L of residual sugar).

 

From experience, I have settled on adding sugar to a SG of 1.006, since this normally gives an adequate and reliable carbonation in ciders, that have fermented to complete dryness (generally from nutrient rich apples and with or without keeving). 

I have thought that the degree of carbonation was primarily determined by the sugar quantity, but perhaps only in nutrient rich cider?

Do you also take the fermentation speed into consideration when you decide the dose of yeast/nutrients at bottling?

Well, if fermentation goes to dryness, you don't know if there is some nutrient left in the cider at that point. And this is different from the situation above where the fermentation is stuck and I can be pretty sure the nutrients are fully exhausted. Usually, for a fully fermented cider, there would be enough nutrients/yeast left to ferment the sugar addition made at bottling. Hence adding yeast and nutrients is simply a matter of added security in case there would not be enough left. But there is no point (and it can be counter productive) to adding more than what is strictly needed.

One last question: Will you be in Denmark on your Europe tour in April? 😊

Sorry, but no... Will be in Austria for a conference by the 13 to 15th, then the British Cider Week (I'll post the details of the events when all finalized), then Brittany, and Frankfurt CiderWorld to finish.

[Søren Ugilt Larsen]

Thank you very, Claude!

It certainly makes sense to distinguish between a stabilized cider, where the nutrients have been depleted, and a cider that has fermented to dryness, and where the nutrients may or may not have been depleted and, hence, one should be more cautious with the residual sugar for bottle fermentation. 

I have asked Brouwland about the N content in Nutrivit but haven't got an answer yet.

Make sure you include Denmark in your next book tour:-)

Best wishes

Søren

[hammerstone]

Hi Soren,

The thread is interesting and i've been learning along with you.  I noticed in the original post you said "due to lack of a decent balance".  maybe you've rectified that, but last year i had the same problem and bought one of these:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09K5CZDML/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I've only used it a couple of times, but it has functioned quite well.  In case the link doesn't work, it is a 50g capacity, brand is Perphin, it plugs in to a USB power (no batteries!) and cost me about $20 US. 

good luck with the sulphur!

[Claude Jolicoeur]

Wow!

It is quite incredible that we can get a milligram scale for 20$! I got mine for about 100$ some 5 years ago, but it goes to 500g capacity, which is a lot more than that one - and I think that was also a pretty good deal. I remembre in my youth, milligram scales in college labs were costing more like 10 000$ and we were told to be extremely careful with it.

[Wayne Bush]

Soren, I have never experienced H2S formation at bottling (although I never bottle with 71b), but I have had H2S formation in primary fermentation with 71b without adequate nutrient addition.  I think 71b is a vigorous and hungry yeast at the right temperature and makes a stink if it is not properly fed.  The taint was easily eliminated however by splash racking.  

[Wes Cherry]

Splash racking only oxidizes h2s and mercaptans to disulfides (which themselves aren’t great qualities in a cider).   The sulfur is still there and can reduce in bottle back to nasty h2s/merc forms.

-'//es Cherry

Dragon's Head Cider

Vashon Island, Wa US

www.dragonsheadcider.com

On Apr 1, 2023, at 4:31 PM, Wayne Bush <butter...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Soren, I have never experienced H2S formation at bottling (although I never bottle with 71b), but I have had H2S formation in primary fermentation with 71b without adequate nutrient addition.  I think 71b is a vigorous and hungry yeast at the right temperature and makes a stink if it is not properly fed.  The taint was easily eliminated however by splash racking.  

--
--
Visit our website: http://www.ciderworkshop.com
 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "Cider Workshop" Google Group.
By joining the Cider Workshop, you agree to abide by our principles. Please see http://www.ciderworkshop.com/resources_principles.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cider Workshop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cider-worksho...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cider-workshop/850375cb-9f71-4548-b1bd-205e507efa6dn%40googlegroups.com.

[Søren Ugilt Larsen]

Thank you for all your comments. I think I will stay away from using Lalvin 71b for bottle conditioning - and feed it well if used for the main fermentation :-)

Just a follow up on the N content of Nutrivit: Brouwland has informed me that 100 g Nutrivit contains 40 g pure N. With 10% N in yeast, 1 g of Nutrivit should be equivalent to adding 4 g of yeast, in terms of pure N. Claude, am I right in calculating that these mixtures of yeast and Nutrivit should all result in similar quantities of N as 20 ppm pure yeast - and, hence, an adequate sparkle in a stabilized cider?:

- 10 ppm yeast + 2.5 ppm Nutrivit

- no yeast + 5 ppm Nutrivit

I have done keeving for a few years, but I am still not fully confident with the control of the fermentation speed, and I have been cautious (perhaps overcautious) with bottling cider with SG above 1.010 due to the risk of overcarbonation. According to your book, Claude, the fermentation speed should be around 5 fermentation speed units (i.e. a drop in SG of 1 degree in 20 days) when bottling whereas a speed of 4 FSU will not give provide enough carbonation. You also mention that the fermentation temperature should be at least 10C when measuring the fermentation speed. However, I am still a bit confused about the relationship between fermentation temperature and fermentation speed; I suppose the fermentation speed will be higher at 15C than at 10C - and even higher at 20C?

Therefore, the alternative approach of stabilizing the cider by keeving and multiple rackings and addition of a precise dose of yeast/N at bottling may perhaps be a more reliable method for controlling the fermentation after bottling?

One last thing: For the batches from the 2022 harvest, I have often moved the fermentation vessels to a lower temperature (0-5C) for a few days before racking to let a larger proportion of the yeast cells sediment (cold crashing, I suppose?). This seems to be much more efficient in terms of slowing down fermentation than racking of the cider at the normal fermentation temperature (typically 10-15C). Do you also use this as a means for slowing the fermentation (be it cider or ice cider)?

Best wishes

Søren

[Claude Jolicoeur]

Le mercredi 5 avril 2023 à 06:49:30 UTC-4, Søren Ugilt Larsen a écrit :

Just a follow up on the N content of Nutrivit: Brouwland has informed me that 100 g Nutrivit contains 40 g pure N. With 10% N in yeast, 1 g of Nutrivit should be equivalent to adding 4 g of yeast, in terms of pure N. Claude, am I right in calculating that these mixtures of yeast and Nutrivit should all result in similar quantities of N as 20 ppm pure yeast - and, hence, an adequate sparkle in a stabilized cider?:

- 10 ppm yeast + 2.5 ppm Nutrivit

- no yeast + 5 ppm Nutrivit

I am quite surprised by this very high content in N. If correct, then your numbers are good. However I'd suggest you make some tests before bottling to a large batch.

 

I have done keeving for a few years, but I am still not fully confident with the control of the fermentation speed, and I have been cautious (perhaps overcautious) with bottling cider with SG above 1.010 due to the risk of overcarbonation. According to your book, Claude, the fermentation speed should be around 5 fermentation speed units (i.e. a drop in SG of 1 degree in 20 days) when bottling whereas a speed of 4 FSU will not give provide enough carbonation.

From my experience, I usually get a good sparkle and the right amount of residual sugar when the cider is nicely clarified, SG around 1.012 to 1.014 and the speed of fermentation is around 15 FSU at 10C.

However these conditions are not often met simultaneously...

 

You also mention that the fermentation temperature should be at least 10C when measuring the fermentation speed. However, I am still a bit confused about the relationship between fermentation temperature and fermentation speed; I suppose the fermentation speed will be higher at 15C than at 10C - and even higher at 20C?

Yes, increasing the temperature of the fermenting cider will also increase the FSU. There exist a correction formula that I have tried using, but I don't find it very accurate.

Therefore, the alternative approach of stabilizing the cider by keeving and multiple rackings and addition of a precise dose of yeast/N at bottling may perhaps be a more reliable method for controlling the fermentation after bottling?

Yes I think so.

 

One last thing: For the batches from the 2022 harvest, I have often moved the fermentation vessels to a lower temperature (0-5C) for a few days before racking to let a larger proportion of the yeast cells sediment (cold crashing, I suppose?). This seems to be much more efficient in terms of slowing down fermentation than racking of the cider at the normal fermentation temperature (typically 10-15C). Do you also use this as a means for slowing the fermentation (be it cider or ice cider)?

No, but my fermentation room is at 8C during winter.

[Søren Ugilt Larsen]

Thanks a lot for your comments, Claude!

Best wishes Søren

ons. 5. apr. 2023 kl. 12.49 skrev Søren Ugilt Larsen <sorenugi...@gmail.com>:

Thank you for all your comments. I think I will stay away from using Lalvin 71b for bottle conditioning - and feed it well if used for the main fermentation :-)

Just a follow up on the N content of Nutrivit: Brouwland has o me that 100 g Nutrivit contains 40 g pure N. With 10% N in yeast, 1 g of Nutrivit should be equivalent to adding 4 g of yeast, in terms of pure N. Claude, am I right in calculating that these mixtures of yeast and Nutrivit should all result in similar quantities of N as 20 ppm pure yeast - and, hence, an adequate sparkle in a stabilized cider?: