Read on to learn about the studies performed!
PurePitch Next Generation is the only packaging designed specifically to store liquid yeast cultures. This updated design builds on the original PurePitch, delivering the same top-quality cultures with an improved, modular, and easy-to-use format. Unsurprisingly, these improvements provide clear benefits to brewers, including extended storage and more consistent fermentation performance.
We conducted two studies to evaluate the improvements of PurePitch Next Generation.
The first study tracked the viability, performance, and purity of PurePitch Next Generation pouches throughout storage.
The scope of this experiment was simple: monitor yeast viability over time, run mini fermentations to evaluate performance, and check for microbial contamination after each sampling and recapping of the port. This was performed numerous times on various strains. Below we demonstrate an example for WLP066 London Fog Ale Yeast.
Data tracked over 28 days below for a lot of WLP066 London Fog Ale Yeast in PurePitch Next Generation packaging shows outstanding results consistent with our testing performed. Viability remained remarkably high, consistently ranging from 99.31% to 99.53% throughout the entire study with variance due to the inherent variance in cell counting. Starting viability on Day 0 was 99.45% and remained consistent with a final test viability of 99.48% on Day 28.
Mini fermentation results demonstrated excellent consistency in performance. The attenuation at 72 hours remained strong, ranging from 82.40% to 83.20% across all measured time points (Day 3, 7, 10, 14, and 28).
The starting pH was 4.68, lower than typical knock-out pH targets due to these mini-fermentations being run in a lab and not for consumer consumption. The important factor to evaluate is the consistent, quick pH drop in the initial 72 hours. All fermentations showed that pH after 72 hours consistently dropped signaling active metabolism and healthy fermentations.
Microbial contamination checks (HLP, WLD, LCSM) showed clean results with proper handling. Contamination was None Detected on Day 0, Day 3, Day 7, and Day 28.
Want to see how PurePitch Next Generation performs with your house strains?
Browse yeast strains available in PurePitch® Next Generation packaging.
The second study compared the new PurePitch Next Generation packaging to the prior PurePitch design to determine whether improvements in fermentation performance could be observed as a result of extended shelf life and improved overall yeast health during storage. This study included multiple yeast strains representing different beer clade groups described in the Gallone et al. paper, Domestication and divergence of Saccharomyces cerevisiae beer yeasts.
Shown are fermentations with WLP001 California Ale Yeast and WLP530 Abbey Ale Yeast.
As illustrated in the graphs below, cultures stored in PurePitch Next Generation packaging showed an increased rate of fermentation compared to the original PurePitch. The speed of attenuation is one indicator of overall yeast health, as more vital cultures perform metabolic functions more efficiently, leading to consistent, high-quality fermentations.
The Viability Over Time study of PurePitch Next Generation pouches demonstrated that yeast maintained exceptional viability and delivered consistent attenuation performance over a four-week period. These benefits carried over into the second study, where PurePitch Next Generation outperformed the prior PurePitch design.
By maintaining yeast health throughout storage, this packaging supports more consistent fermentations, improved performance, and reliable flavor production, reinforcing PurePitch Next Generation as a true next-generation product.
For brewers focused on consistency, planning flexibility, and fermentation performance, PurePitch® Next Generation isn't just an upgrade, it's a production advantage.
Gallone, B., Steensels, J., Prahl, T., Soriaga, L., Saels, V., Herrera-Malaver, B., et al. (2016). Domestication and divergence of Saccharomyces cerevisiae beer yeasts. Cell, 166(6), 1397–1410.