evaluation of terroir effects on the brewing value of …€¦ · preliminary study of terroir...

EVALUATION OF TERROIR EFFECTS

ON THE BREWING VALUE OF HOPSANN VAN HOLLE, DE PROEFBROUWERIJ

HOP & BREW SCHOOL 2019, YAKIMA

IntroductionPreliminary study of terroir significance

Conclusions

Hop terroir study

Genetic fingerprinting

Biochemical fingerprinting

Case studies

cv. Amarillo

cv. Cascade

PRELIMINARY STUDY OF TERROIR SIGNIFICANCE

3

BIOCHEMICAL PROPERTIES

TASTE / AROMABEER

QUALITY

HOP

BREWING VALUE


4

divergent hop aroma profile

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.

Specific case: Amarillo single-hop beer

Amarillo hops cultivated in

Idaho ↔ Washington State

BEER

QUALITY

HOP

BREWING VALUE


5

BEER

QUALITY

HOP

BREWING VALUE

TERROIRgeology

soilclimate

cultivation practices


6

biochemical fingerprinting

BEER

QUALITY

HOP

BREWING VALUE

VARIETY TERROIR

genetic fingerprinting


Conclusions

Hop terroir study



Case studies

cv. Amarillo

cv. Centennial

HOP TERROIR STUDY |APPROACH

8

SAMPLING hop cones

20 varieties; crop 2015 – 2016 – 2017Amarillo – Cascade – Centennial – Chinook –

Citra – Fuggle – Golding – Hallertau Mittelfrüh –

Magnum – Mosaic – Mt. Hood – Northern

Brewer – Perle – Saaz – Simcoe – Sorachi Ace –

Tettnanger – Tradition – Willamette – Zeus

Genetic and biochemical

fingerprinting HOPS

Biochemical and sensory

profiling single hop BEERS

HOP TERROIR STUDY |APPROACH

9

http://blog.mikkeller.dk/mikkeller-launches-terroir-series

RECIPE

NEIPA style

Original gravity 16°P

Alcohol 7% ABV

Hop dosage (pellets T90)

-Late hopping: 250 g/hL

-Dry hopping: 1000 g/hL

• Genetic fingerprinting

10


fingerprinting HOPS

HOP TERROIR STUDY |METHODOLOGY

HOP (Humulus lupulus L.) HUMAN

Chromosomes 2n=20 2n=46

Genome size 2,57 Gb 3,23 Mb

Genes 50,000 23,000


• SNP markers

(GBS genotyping-by-sequencing)

→ Authenticity control of hop batches

toward varietal origin

11


fingerprinting HOPS


Van Holle A., Muylle H., Ruttink T., Van Landschoot A., Haesaert G., Naudts D., De Keukeleire D., and Roldan-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.

Phylogenetic relationships among 56 varieties

Cluster analysis (Nei, UPGMA)

based on 1,830 polymorphic SNP markers

• 48 unique genetic fingerprints

• 3 groups of somaclonal variants

(identical genetic fingerprints)

12

Genetic fingerprinting of hops



• Biochemical fingerprinting

• 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

13


fingerprinting HOPS

Van Holle A., Muylle H., Ruttink T., Van Landschoot A., Haesaert G., Naudts D., De Keukeleire D., and Roldan-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.


• Aroma profiling (HS-SPME-GC-MS)

• Sensory evaluation

• Triangle tests

• Descriptive analysis

14

Biochemical and sensory

profiling single hop BEERS

ODOUR main / side impression(s)

AROMA main / side impression(s)

TASTE

- Bitter intensity

- Bitterness quality

- After-bitterness quality

- Astringency

GLOBAL APPRECIATION

CASE STUDY – AMARILLO

Cluster analysis (Pearson, UPGMA)

based on hop aroma profile


based on SNP genotyping data

100

80

60

40

α-a

cid

s (%

)

11.0

9.8

9.9

7.9

8.8

7.5

7.5

7.5

6.7

8.9

7.0

6.1

8.8

α/β

1.8

1.7

1.4

1.4

1.3

1.3

1.3

1.3

1.5

1.6

1.4

1.3

2.4

oil (

mL/1

00g

)

2.4

2.0

2.5

2.0

2.5

1.6

1.8

2.2

0.9

1.1

1.4

0.8

2.5

AMA_WA(1)_2017

AMA_WA(2)_2017

AMA_WA(1)_2015

AMA_WA(2)_2015

AMA_WA(1)_2016

AMA_WA(2)_2016

AMA_WA(3)_2016

AMA_WA(3)_2015

AMA_ID(1)_2015

AMA_ID(1)_2016

AMA_ID(1)_2017

AMA_DE(1)_2017

CEN_WA(1)_2016

Washington, USA

Washington, USA

Washington, USA

Washington, USA

Washington, USA

Washington, USA

Washington, USA

Washington, USA

Idaho, USA

Idaho, USA

Idaho, USA

Germany

Washington, USA

100 80

60

40

20


16

WA, USA ID, USA Germany

CITRUSgrapefruit,

orange, lemongrapefruit

orange,

tangerine

FRUITYtropical fruits,

lychee, apricot

green apple,

tropical fruits

WOODY resin resin

SPICY pepper0

1

2

3

4

5

FLORAL

CITRUS

FRUITY

WOODYGREEN/GRASSY

HERBAL

SPICY


17

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

(score 0-8) 3 4 4

Global appreciation

(score 0-10) 6.4 5.3 5.7

TRIANGLE TESTS

Significant difference between

the 3 Amarillo beers

3.67 3.51 3.47

CASE STUDY – CASCADE

100

80

60

40

α-a

cid

s (%

)

7.2

6.1

8.6

6.8

6.4

4.8

6.1

4.8

6.2

6.8

6.4

7.9

6.4

7.6

6.9

6.5

8.4

6.3

5.1

4.7

8.8

α/β

1.0

1.0

1.2

1.3

1.0

0.7

1.0

0.9

1.2

1.1

1.1

1.3

1.3

1.4

1.0

1.1

1.2

0.9

1.0

1.3

2.4

oil (

mL/1

00g

)

1.9

0.9

1.3

1.1

0.9

1.0

0.9

0.9

0.8

0.8

1.4

1.1

1.1

0.8

1.6

1.3

0.9

1.0

0.8

0.4

2.5

CAS_OR(1)_2015

CAS_WA(1)_2016

CAS_OR(1)_2016

CAS_OR(1)_2017

CAS_WA(2)_2016

CAS_ID(1)_2015

CAS_ID(1)_2016

CAS_ID(1)_2017

CAS_WA(1)_2015

CAS_WA(2)_2015

CAS_WA(1)_2017

CAS_AU(1)_2016

CAS_AU(1)_2018

CAS_AU(1)_2017

CAS_DE(1)_2015

CAS_BE(1)_2016

CAS_DE(1)_2016

CAS_DE(1)_2017

CAS_BE(1)_2015

CAS_BE(1)_2017

CEN_WA(1)_2016

Oregon, USA

Washington, USA

Oregon, USA

Oregon, USA

Washington, USA

Idaho, USA

Idaho, USA

Idaho, USA

Washington, USA

Washington, USA

Washington, USA

Australia

Australia

Australia

Germany

Belgium

Germany

Germany

Belgium

Belgium

Washington, USA

100

50

0


based on hop aroma profile


based on SNP genotyping data


19

Germany Australia WA, USA

CITRUSgrapefruit,

tangerinegrapefruit grapefruit

FRUITY lychee, apple tropical fruits tropical fruits

WOODY resin

GREEN grassy

HERBAL green tea

SPICY pepper

0

1

2

3

4

5

FLORAL

CITRUS

FRUITY

WOODYGREEN/GRASSY

HERBAL

SPICY


20

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

(score 0-8) 3 4 3

Global appreciation

(score 0-10) 5.8 6.3 6.7

TRIANGLE TESTS

Significant difference between

the 3 Cascade beers

3.47 3.46 3.55


Conclusions

Hop terroir study



Case studies

cv. Amarillo

cv. Cascade

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES

22

BEER

QUALITY

HOP

BREWING VALUE

VARIETY TERROIR

yearly variations < terroir effects

soil?

climate?

specific impact of terroir on taste and aroma of beer?

rapid and reliable

identification in practice?

THANKS TO

• 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

evaluation of terroir effects on the brewing value of …€¦ · preliminary study of terroir...

Documents