1 / 23

Evaluation of Terroir Effects on Brewing Value of Hops

This study evaluates the significance of terroir on the brewing value of hops, focusing on the case of Amarillo hops cultivated in Idaho and Washington State. Genetic and biochemical fingerprinting, as well as sensory evaluation, were conducted to analyze the hop's properties and beer quality.

jbankston
Download Presentation

Evaluation of Terroir Effects on Brewing Value of Hops

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. evaluation of TERROIR effectson the brewing value of hopsAnn Van Holle, De Proefbrouwerij Hop & Brew School 2019, Yakima

  2. Introduction Preliminary study of terroir significance Hop terroir study Genetic fingerprinting Biochemical fingerprinting Case studies cv. Amarillo cv. Cascade Conclusions

  3. Preliminary study of terroir significance HOP BREWING VALUE BIOCHEMICAL PROPERTIES BEER QUALITY TASTE / AROMA

  4. Preliminary study of terroir significance Specific case: Amarillo single-hop beer Amarillo hops cultivated in Idaho ↔ Washington State HOP BREWING VALUE divergent hop aroma profile BEER QUALITY less citrussy aroma, more piney and grassy flavours Van Holle A., Van Landschoot A., Roldán-Ruiz I., Naudts D., and De Keukeleire D. The brewing value of Amarillo hops (Humulus lupulus L.) grown in northwestern USA: A preliminary study of terroir significance. J. Inst. Brew., 2017, 123(3): 312-318.

  5. Preliminary study of terroir significance TERROIR geology soil climate cultivation practices HOP BREWING VALUE BEER QUALITY

  6. Preliminary study of terroir significance VARIETY TERROIR geneticfingerprinting biochemicalfingerprinting HOP BREWING VALUE BEER QUALITY

  7. Introduction Preliminary study of terroir significance Hop terroir study Genetic fingerprinting Biochemical fingerprinting Case studies cv. Amarillo cv. Centennial Conclusions

  8. Hop terroirstudy|approach Genetic and biochemical fingerprinting HOPS SAMPLING hop cones 20 varieties; crop 2015 – 2016 – 2017 Amarillo – Cascade – Centennial – Chinook – Citra – Fuggle – Golding – Hallertau Mittelfrüh – Magnum – Mosaic – Mt. Hood – Northern Brewer – Perle – Saaz – Simcoe – Sorachi Ace – Tettnanger – Tradition – Willamette – Zeus Biochemical and sensory profiling single hop BEERS

  9. Hop terroirstudy|approach RECIPE NEIPA style Original gravity 16°P Alcohol 7% ABV Hop dosage (pellets T90) • Late hopping: 250 g/hL • Dry hopping: 1000 g/hL http://blog.mikkeller.dk/mikkeller-launches-terroir-series

  10. Hop terroirstudy|methodology • Geneticfingerprinting Genetic and biochemical fingerprinting HOPS

  11. Hop terroirstudy|methodology • Geneticfingerprinting • SNP markers (GBS genotyping-by-sequencing)  Authenticity control of hop batches towardvarietalorigin Genetic and biochemical fingerprinting HOPS Van Holle A., Muylle H., Ruttink T., Van Landschoot A., Haesaert G., Naudts D., De Keukeleire D., and Roldán-Ruiz I. Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms and biochemical markers as complementary tools to characterize hops (Humulus lupulus L.) in brewing practice. J. Agric. Food Chem., 2019, 67: 3761-3771.

  12. Genetic fingerprinting of hops Phylogeneticrelationshipsamong 56 varieties Cluster analysis (Nei, UPGMA) based on 1,830 polymorphic SNP markers • 48 uniquegeneticfingerprints • 3 groups of somaclonalvariants (identicalgeneticfingerprints)

  13. Hop terroirstudy|methodology • Geneticfingerprinting • Biochemicalfingerprinting • Hop acids (ASBC Hops-6A) and HSI ‘Hop Storage Index’ (ASBC Hops-12) • Hop oil content (EBC 7.10) • Hop aroma profiling (in-house HS-SPME-GC-MS method)  Classification of hops according to growth location Genetic and biochemical fingerprinting HOPS Van Holle A., Muylle H., Ruttink T., Van Landschoot A., Haesaert G., Naudts D., De Keukeleire D., and Roldán-Ruiz I. Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms and biochemical markers as complementary tools to characterize hops (Humulus lupulus L.) in brewing practice. J. Agric. Food Chem., 2019, 67: 3761-3771.

  14. Hop terroirstudy|methodology • Aroma profiling (HS-SPME-GC-MS) • Sensoryevaluation • Triangle tests • Descriptive analysis • ODOUR main / side impression(s) • AROMA main / side impression(s) • TASTE • Bitter intensity • Bitternessquality • After-bitternessquality • Astringency • GLOBAL APPRECIATION Biochemical and sensory profiling single hop BEERS

  15. Case study – Amarillo oil (mL/100g) α-acids (%) α/β 100 40 60 80 AMA_WA(1)_2017 Washington, USA 11.0 1.8 2.4 Washington, USA AMA_WA(2)_2017 100 20 40 60 80 9.8 1.7 2.0 Washington, USA AMA_WA(1)_2015 9.9 1.4 2.5 AMA_WA(2)_2015 Washington, USA 7.9 1.4 2.0 AMA_WA(1)_2016 Washington, USA 8.8 1.3 2.5 Washington, USA AMA_WA(2)_2016 7.5 1.3 1.6 Washington, USA AMA_WA(3)_2016 7.5 1.3 1.8 Washington, USA AMA_WA(3)_2015 7.5 1.3 2.2 AMA_ID(1)_2015 Idaho, USA 6.7 1.5 0.9 AMA_ID(1)_2016 Idaho, USA 8.9 1.6 1.1 Idaho, USA AMA_ID(1)_2017 7.0 1.4 1.4 Germany AMA_DE(1)_2017 6.1 1.3 0.8 Washington, USA CEN_WA(1)_2016 8.8 2.4 2.5 Cluster analysis (Pearson, UPGMA) based on SNP genotyping data Cluster analysis (Pearson, UPGMA) based on hop aroma profile

  16. Case study – Amarillo FLORAL 5 4 SPICY CITRUS 3 2 1 0 HERBAL FRUITY WOODY GREEN/GRASSY

  17. Case study – Amarillo WA, USA ID, USA Germany Bitter intensity (score 0-8) 5 4 4 Bitterness quality pleasant 18 11 14 neutral 1 5 5 unpleasant 1 5 0 After-bitterness pleasant 14 10 11 neutral 5 6 7 unpleasant 1 5 1 not perceivable 0 0 0 Astringency TRIANGLE TESTS Significant difference between the 3 Amarillo beers (score 0-8) 3 4 4 Global appreciation (score 0-10) 6.4 5.3 5.7 3.67 3.513.47

  18. Case study – Cascade oil (mL/100g) α-acids (%) α/β 100 100 80 50 40 60 0 CAS_OR(1)_2015 Oregon, USA 7.2 1.0 1.9 CAS_WA(1)_2016 Washington, USA 6.1 1.0 0.9 CAS_OR(1)_2016 Oregon, USA 8.6 1.2 1.3 CAS_OR(1)_2017 Oregon, USA 6.8 1.3 1.1 CAS_WA(2)_2016 Washington, USA 6.4 1.0 0.9 CAS_ID(1)_2015 Idaho, USA 4.8 0.7 1.0 CAS_ID(1)_2016 Idaho, USA 6.1 1.0 0.9 CAS_ID(1)_2017 Idaho, USA 4.8 0.9 0.9 CAS_WA(1)_2015 Washington, USA 6.2 1.2 0.8 CAS_WA(2)_2015 Washington, USA 6.8 1.1 0.8 CAS_WA(1)_2017 Washington, USA 6.4 1.1 1.4 CAS_AU(1)_2016 Australia 7.9 1.3 1.1 CAS_AU(1)_2018 Australia 6.4 1.3 1.1 CAS_AU(1)_2017 Australia 7.6 1.4 0.8 CAS_DE(1)_2015 Germany 6.9 1.0 1.6 CAS_BE(1)_2016 Belgium 6.5 1.1 1.3 CAS_DE(1)_2016 Germany 8.4 1.2 0.9 CAS_DE(1)_2017 Germany 6.3 0.9 1.0 CAS_BE(1)_2015 Belgium 5.1 1.0 0.8 CAS_BE(1)_2017 Belgium 4.7 1.3 0.4 CEN_WA(1)_2016 Washington, USA 8.8 2.4 2.5 Cluster analysis (Pearson, UPGMA) based on hop aroma profile Cluster analysis (Pearson, UPGMA) based on SNP genotyping data

  19. Case study – Cascade FLORAL 5 4 SPICY CITRUS 3 2 1 0 HERBAL FRUITY WOODY GREEN/GRASSY

  20. Case study – Cascade Germany Australia WA, USA Bitter intensity (score 0-8) 3 5 4 Bitterness quality pleasant 16 14 18 neutral 5 5 2 unpleasant 0 1 0 After-bitterness pleasant 11 13 18 neutral 8 2 2 unpleasant 0 5 0 not perceivable 2 0 0 Astringency TRIANGLE TESTS Significant difference between the 3 Cascade beers (score 0-8) 3 4 3 Global appreciation (score 0-10) 5.8 6.3 6.7 3.47 3.46 3.55

  21. Introduction Preliminary study of terroir significance Hop terroir study Genetic fingerprinting Biochemical fingerprinting Case studies cv. Amarillo cv. Cascade Conclusions

  22. ConclusionsandFuturePerspectives soil? VARIETY TERROIR climate? yearly variations < terroir effects rapid and reliable identification in practice? HOP BREWING VALUE specific impact of terroir on taste and aroma of beer? BEER QUALITY

  23. Thanksto • De Proefbrouwerij team • Hopgrowers/-distributors • Research partners • YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION prof. Geert Haesaert prof. dr. Isabel Roldán-Ruiz ereprof. dr. Anita Van Landschoot ereprof. dr. Denis De Keukeleire

More Related