# MLF - coinocculation versus post-AF innoculation



## fafrd (Sep 4, 2017)

Upon thevadvise of my local wineshop, I coinnoculated last year (MLF innoculation 24h after pitching yeast) and everything worked out well.

Gearing up for this season, I've been doing more research on MLF and it seems most references recommend innoculating at the end of alcoholic fermentation (0 BRIX) or even after racking off of the gross lees (24-48 hours after pressing).

From what I've read, the primary reason to avoid coinnoculation is fear of VA (bacteria consuming sugar).

I'm curious whether most home winemakers are coinnculating or innoculating at 0 BRIX or post-press.

For those who co-innoculate, has anyone ever had an issue with VA?


----------



## heatherd (Sep 4, 2017)

I co-inoculate typically and have not had issues.

Here's a link to a Scott Labs document that goes into more detail:
http://www.scottlab.com/uploads/documents/downloads/318/ML Brochure.pdf


----------



## Johnd (Sep 5, 2017)

My preference is to conduct MLF concurrently with AF, it typically continues on for several weeks past the completion of AF. Have not ever encountered any problems doing it this way.


----------



## Ajmassa (Sep 5, 2017)

I noticed more adding ML after primary than during. Benefitting from not having any gross lees with the ML. 
I have only 2 MLf's under my belt, and circumstances forced me to coinnoculate. With some guidance from Johnd I added ML after yeast kicked off and directly with yeast in 2nd batch (via skins). 
I noticed many other member's batches with same grapes took much longer to complete. But both of my mlf's finished <30 days. - I assume the low alcohol at 1st helped. Faster might not be better- but it worked well and I plan to continue.


----------



## geek (Sep 5, 2017)

I, personally, haven't done it.
When I first started making wine from grapes I saw some posts explaining that the yeast and the malo culture could be fighting for nutrients and such and it was advisable to innoculate the malo once AF is depleted or almost done (typically 1.000 is a good point).

I may try co-innoculating a small batch in a near future to see how it goes though.


----------



## Ajmassa (Sep 5, 2017)

geek said:


> I, personally, haven't done it.
> When I first started making wine from grapes I saw some posts explaining that the yeast and the malo culture could be fighting for nutrients and such and it was advisable to innoculate the malo once AF is depleted or almost done (typically 1.000 is a good point).
> 
> I may try co-innoculating a small batch in a near future to see how it goes though.





Good point. Either method seems to have both pros and cons. But I liked how I was able to just bang it all out at once. I'm thinking properly using Acti-ML, opti-malo, fermaid k etc... helped counter the battle for nutrients. 
Also, if it does in fact help MLF finish faster, then another benefit is the ability to get some so2 in there sooner for protection. I tested completion just under 30 days but let it go further and finally stabilized after 8 weeks. Much more comforting than 3 or 4 moths.


----------



## fafrd (Sep 5, 2017)

Ajmassa5983 said:


> *I noticed more adding ML after primary than during. *Benefitting from not having any gross lees with the ML.
> I have only 2 MLf's under my belt, and circumstances forced me to coinnoculate. With some guidance from Johnd I added ML after yeast kicked off and directly with yeast in 2nd batch (via skins).
> I noticed many other member's batches with same grapes took much longer to complete. But both of my mlf's finished <30 days. - I assume the low alcohol at 1st helped. Faster might not be better- but it worked well and I plan to continue.



You mean you noticed more VA when innoculating at the end of AF?

The only downside I've been able to identify against co-innoculation is the potential for VA - if that's not a problem any of us home winemakers typically run into, it's much easier process-wise to co-innoculate.

Anyone actually tried co-innoculation and regretted it due to VA production?


----------



## fafrd (Sep 5, 2017)

geek said:


> I, personally, haven't done it.
> When I first started making wine from grapes I saw some posts explaining that the yeast and the malo culture could be fighting for nutrients and such and it was advisable to innoculate the malo once AF is depleted or almost done (typically 1.000 is a good point).
> 
> I may try co-innoculating a small batch in a near future to see how it goes though.



That's the conventional wisdom...

So you innoculate into primary at 1.000 before you press? Do you rack off of gross lees?


----------



## fafrd (Sep 5, 2017)

heatherd said:


> I co-inoculate typically and have not had issues.
> 
> Here's a link to a Scott Labs document that goes into more detail:
> http://www.scottlab.com/uploads/documents/downloads/318/ML Brochure.pdf



Thanks for that link - I'd not seen that before.

The primary benefit of co-innoculation is to get the bacteria well-established while the environment is especially inviting (low alcohol). So MLF is supposed to finish much more quickly and reliably.

The benefits of post-press innoculation are avoidibg any possibility of VA (no more sugar) and only introducibg MLF bacteria once off of gross lees.

But getting MLF started in alcoholic wine is tougher (though that is how the bacteria has been doing it for centuries within oak barrels ).


----------



## pgentile (Sep 5, 2017)

I have co-innoculated my last two batches in the spring. Didn't have VA problem but with my Malbec MLF never kicked off due to low pH. Got it to kick off eventually with k-bicarb adjustment and re-innoculation. With my S Afr Cab Sauv MLF completed nicely.


----------



## geek (Sep 5, 2017)

fafrd said:


> That's the conventional wisdom...
> 
> So you innoculate into primary at 1.000 before you press? Do you rack off of gross lees?



At 1.000 or so, I press. Then I wait 24~48 hours and then I rack and finally MLB goes.


----------



## skeenatron (Sep 5, 2017)

I do about 45 different lots of red each year and have had all kinds of MLF results using CH16 bacteria and various yeasts. I've always added bacteria after primary and sometimes it takes off really well and is finished in a week or two. Sometimes it takes two months. Sometimes it never takes off and I have to heat up the barrels and reinoculate. At the end of the day the results have always been fine, although there's always better barrels than others. Hard to pin it on MLF though.

This year I am going to do a lot of 1/2 regular (post-primary) bacteria inoculation, and 1/2 co-fermentation. I'm hoping I can get quicker, smoother MLFs out of the co-fermentations. I'm in the process of checking my yeasts for compatibility. I'll be sure to post the results later in the season.


----------



## fafrd (Sep 6, 2017)

skeenatron said:


> I do about 45 different lots of red each year and have had all kinds of MLF results using CH16 bacteria and various yeasts. I've always added bacteria after primary and sometimes it takes off really well and is finished in a week or two. Sometimes it takes two months. Sometimes it never takes off and I have to heat up the barrels and reinoculate. At the end of the day the results have always been fine, although there's always better barrels than others. Hard to pin it on MLF though.
> 
> This year I am going to do a lot of 1/2 regular (post-primary) bacteria inoculation, and 1/2 co-fermentation. I'm hoping I can get quicker, smoother MLFs out of the co-fermentations. I'm in the process of checking my yeasts for compatibility. I'll be sure to post the results later in the season.



Lloking forward to your results!


----------



## fafrd (Sep 6, 2017)

geek said:


> At 1.000 or so, I press. Then I wait 24~48 hours and then I rack *and finally MLB goes.*



'Goes' as in starts (takes-off)?

'Goes' as in 'goes in' (meaning you innoculate after racking off of gross lees)?


----------



## GreginND (Sep 6, 2017)

This is just my hunch, but I think having some sugar left in there when inoculating with MLF would be beneficial to get the bacteria population growing well. And the heat from AF would help the bacteria. I have inoculated at about 2/3 sugar depletion of AF and have had good results, but I don't have enough data points to know for sure what the trends are. I will probably try inoculation one or two days after yeast addition this year. My guess is that it really doesn't matter when you add the MLB as long as you have enough nutrients for all.


----------



## geek (Sep 6, 2017)

fafrd said:


> 'Goes' as in starts (takes-off)?
> 
> 'Goes' as in 'goes in' (meaning you innoculate after racking off of gross lees)?



Meaning I pitch the MLB.


----------



## Stressbaby (Sep 6, 2017)

I have read (but not confirmed independently) that co-inoculation results in slight loss of color and complexity compared to sequential.


----------



## Ajmassa (Sep 6, 2017)

Stressbaby said:


> I have read (but not confirmed independently) that co-inoculation results in slight loss of color and complexity compared to sequential.





I did a lot of reading up on this topic leading up to my first MLF in spring. I will look for these articles and share if I find them. 
From the researching I learned:

The accepted standard is inoculating ML after racked off gross lees. Doing it this way is would get the most and best out of what the MLF has to give- from a factual scientific standpoint (I remember the reasoning was multiple items and very detailed on all points) BUT can also not be the most ideal method for home winemakers. 
From a logic and reason standpoint co-inoculating is growing more popular. Given a home winemakers limited lab and means, it's a matter of risk and choosing the lesser of two evils. 
-adding ML after AF and getting the most out of it, but with a higher risk of not starting/stalling/ or taking a very long time. 
-adding during AF giving MLF a higher probability of starting/finishing/ and potentially in a much shorter amount of time. But risk having results that could potentially be 'less than' that of adding malo 'after AF'. 

Personally I read that not as "negative" results, but more like "less positive" if that makes any sense. Like donating $100 to charity vs donating $75. Both ways still affect your wine for the better. 
I really have no clue how noticeable the difference would be without a controlled taste test. But I figured it would be minimal and maybe not even noticeable to some. I will continue to co-inoculate simply because it worked so well for me. 
What is really needed is for someone to divide a batch right from the jump so they can inoculate both ways and logging all the progress and final tasting. But that's a hella amount of extra work for something I believe would be minimal differences.

---I just reread my post and realized I gave no info at all for any of the reasoning. I need to dig that article up.


----------



## Ajmassa (Sep 6, 2017)

This one was as detailed as you could ever need. 
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1352216/#!po=33.0000


http://lallemandwine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/WE4-China.pdf


----------



## fafrd (Sep 6, 2017)

Ajmassa5983 said:


> This one was as detailed as you could ever need.
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1352216/#!po=33.0000
> 
> 
> http://lallemandwine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/WE4-China.pdf



That lallemand article was great. They claim equivalet or less VA production from co-innoculation, so I'm going to stick to co-innoculation...


----------



## heatherd (Sep 8, 2017)

Ajmassa5983 said:


> This one was as detailed as you could ever need.
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1352216/#!po=33.0000
> 
> 
> http://lallemandwine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/WE4-China.pdf



I agree, the Lallemand document is fab! I co-inoculated at first because I was equal parts impatient and lazy. It's nice to know that it's not detrimental.


----------



## NorCal (Sep 8, 2017)

I mlf after AF, I suppose only because that was the way I was taught and it has never failed.


----------



## cmason1957 (Sep 8, 2017)

I am in the add the Mlf after fermentation completed camp also. Never fails. Oh and always use a good ml bacteria. If I were doing a Merlot, I would probably do coinoculation. Merlot is sometimes hard to get going.


----------



## Ajmassa (Sep 8, 2017)

Those articles (and there's many more. Just google search "co-inoculation vs sequential inoculation MLF") were never intended to be anti-sequential. 
I just remembered reading some, not tons, and knew there were findings that said there was no harm or ill effects to your wine from co-inoculation. I didn't realize how "pro co-inoculation" the articles actually were until reading again. This time with a more comprehensive understanding of what I was reading. 
But my original opinion has the same reasoning as you guys. It worked well for me so I'll continue to do it. And that nothing bad can happen by co-inoculation.


----------



## Stressbaby (Sep 8, 2017)

I wouldn't say "nothing bad can happen."

http://www.winemakingtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31593&page=2

bzac knows his stuff as well as or better than anyone on this forum. Now a pro.


----------



## Applegrower (Sep 19, 2017)

New here.

Is anyone making wine in a volume that requires an MLF culture starter? I have 100 gallons of Norton working and need help coming up with a recipe to increase a volume of VP41.

Thanks!


----------



## Redbird1 (Sep 19, 2017)

Although this is from the Wyeast site, I imagine the same principles apply. Malolactic Starter Culture.

Edit: Forgot to use reply so I'm tagging @Applegrower


----------



## Applegrower (Sep 19, 2017)

Yup, found that in the course of doing a search. Wyeast calls for a liquid starter wine VP41 is dry. I don't know how to do a wet to dry conversion.


----------



## Redbird1 (Sep 21, 2017)

If it were my plan, I'd figure out the cell count of the liquid vs. the dry and then rehydrate and build up the VP41 as necessary to reach a similar cell count. In my mind, that would put you at a similar starting point. After that, follow the directions from Wyeast.

Edit: Here is a link to a great brewing resource on yeast. I think you could use this to get you going.

I forgot to hit reply again @Applegrower


----------



## cgallamo (Sep 21, 2017)

If forced to make a decision, I'd throw in with the co-inoculation camp. But I am still on the fence. I have had the battle with H2S, but I have not noticed that mlf timing has had any impact. I do feel more comfortable when I can get the wine protected with sulfite sooner. 

Has anyone tried waiting on this decision until later in AF? Then you would know if you were already having issues with H2S you could wait and fix that first, if it was running smoothly you could inoculate?


----------



## Applegrower (Sep 21, 2017)

In reading and asking others with more experience about co-ferment, my take away is that the chance for problems exceeding my skill set and available tools is too great. 

Just finished pressing 47 gallons into secondary. Will let it set until late tomorrow then rack off the gross lees, will inoculate Saturday with VP41 as per package directions. Have probably 28 gallons more going into secondary tomorrow. Had hoped to save $35 by making a starter with one culture but that will have to wait until next year.


----------



## Mac60 (Sep 21, 2017)

I have 60 gallons of Old Vine Zin currently in primary fermentation, should be ready to press in a day or two, wasn't planning on MLF but im thinking it might be a good idea.
What MLF yeast do you recommend & wheres a good place to buy it. I'm in NJ


----------



## 4score (Sep 21, 2017)

Mac60 said:


> I have 60 gallons of Old Vine Zin currently in primary fermentation, should be ready to press in a day or two, wasn't planning on MLF but im thinking it might be a good idea.
> What MLF yeast do you recommend & wheres a good place to buy it. I'm in NJ



Check out LodiWineLabs.com

They usually have decent prices. This season, I bought most of our supplies from them instead of MoreWine.


----------



## Mac60 (Sep 21, 2017)

Thanks 4score, What type do you recommend for Zins and Cabs


----------



## heatherd (Sep 21, 2017)

Applegrower said:


> In reading and asking others with more experience about co-ferment, my take away is that the chance for problems exceeding my skill set and available tools is too great.
> 
> Just finished pressing 47 gallons into secondary. Will let it set until late tomorrow then rack off the gross lees, will inoculate Saturday with VP41 as per package directions. Have probably 28 gallons more going into secondary tomorrow. Had hoped to save $35 by making a starter with one culture but that will have to wait until next year.



@Applegrower, there's not a right or wrong answer about co-ferment versus sequential. When I started making wine, co-ferment used to be viewed as a bad or unproven thing, and that may not be the case. We're seeing studies that seem to make the choices more equal. For what it's worth, the process is mostly the same; if you can do one you can do the other. Whatever works for you is the best way to go. VP41 is really reliable, so you should be fine, and you can post here if you have troubles and we'll collectively help you.

I will say, having been at this a few years: Lots of folks on the forum make MLF sound scary and stressful and labor-intensive. I don't do half of the stuff (adjusting pH up front to half the total requirement, stirring, racking, step-feeding nutrients, chromatography, making a starter) that the posts say are important. My batches are great anyway, I have won some awards and I view this as a fun hobby, not a job. Could they be more optimized by stirring 7,000 times a day? Maybe, but that's not realistic for me. So, that's the plain, honest truth. I do MLF with VP41 until my wine tastes soft (lactic) rather than tart (malic), then stabilize with kmeta, simple as that. This isn't life or death!


----------



## Ajmassa (Sep 21, 2017)

Great post @heatherd. Love the perspective and was well said.


----------



## Smok1 (Sep 21, 2017)

I want to get in on this thread because im about to do my first mlf. So from what ive read i can either:
Co-inoculate: pitch mlf bacteria 24 hours after pitching yeast. Press at 1.020sg as planned, rack into carboys, and let sit on gross lees until mlf is complete? Even if it takes 2 months on the lees? If i plan on using fermaid k for my yeast throughout the alchohal fermentation do i still add my mlf nutrients when pitching the mlf?

Post inoculate: press as planned, what for alchohal fermentation to complete, rerack off gross lees, adjust ph/ta, pitch mlf nutrients and mlf bacteria.


----------



## Ajmassa (Sep 21, 2017)

There are no rules! Press whenever you want. And inoculate whenever. I read successful MLF pitched same
time with yeast, 24 hrs (which is what I've been doin) 2/3 through AF, and obviously after. But definitely rack again in 1-3 days or whatever to get off the gross lees. You want the light lees. But Not the massive amount of gunk you get from grapes a few days after pressing. You'll be stirring the light lees a couple times a week throughout. 
The yeast nutes and malo nutes are different, so you still add regardless of when you inoculate- if you choose to use em. Just keep up on those notes!


----------



## ceeaton (Sep 21, 2017)

fafrd said:


> That's the conventional wisdom...
> 
> So you innoculate into primary at 1.000 before you press? Do you rack off of gross lees?



I press, let the the wine settle for a few days, rack then inoculate. Never have had an issue, except when I did a batch and wasn't stirring it once a week or so (once I started stirring more frequently, it finished in two weeks if I remember correctly).


----------



## cmason1957 (Sep 21, 2017)

Smok1 said:


> I want to get in on this thread because im about to do my first mlf. So from what ive read i can either:
> Co-inoculate: pitch mlf bacteria 24 hours after pitching yeast. Press at 1.020sg as planned, rack into carboys, and let sit on gross lees until mlf is complete? Even if it takes 2 months on the lees? If i plan on using fermaid k for my yeast throughout the alchohal fermentation do i still add my mlf nutrients when pitching the mlf?
> 
> Post inoculate: press as planned, what for alchohal fermentation to complete, rerack off gross lees, adjust ph/ta, pitch mlf nutrients and mlf bacteria.


If you go with the after fermentation, I wouldn't adjust the pH and ta before mlf, but wait until mlf done. Both will change with mlf.


----------



## Smok1 (Sep 22, 2017)

Sorry one more question, so if i choose to co-inoculate, i still crush my grapes and add kmeta to 50ppm? Wait 24 hours, pitch yeast, then pitch mlf? Or do i need to skip the so2 if i inoculate same time as yeast?


----------



## geek (Sep 22, 2017)

I wouldn't skip the k-meta, the addition will help prevent any wild yeast becoming active.


----------



## Ajmassa (Sep 22, 2017)

Dude, your asking some good questions. Seems like every one is gray, with many discussions had in the past. 
But yes, they say adding up to 50ppm at crush is fine to protect, kill wild yeast, yet still not inhibit MLF. Different strains are more so2 tolerant than others. I've been adding none at all, co-inoculating, and it might sound crazy but I'm 12 days in and it's already arguably finished. 
But I think that was my last "no so2 addition" ever. It's Nerve racking. My juice bucket took off before I even touched it, and they both finished short of being fully dry. 
I don't blame the co-inoculation tho. I blame the no so2 indirectly. Which rushed me to add enzymes and get started instead of properly adjusting ph and dialing the must in 1st. 
If I had a "do-over" I'd add maybe 25-30 ppm, and do my adjustments and still co-inoculate 24-48 hrs after yeast. I think my high ph stressed the AF.


----------



## 4score (Sep 25, 2017)

Mac60 said:


> Thanks 4score, What type do you recommend for Zins and Cabs



CH16 and VP41 are ones we've used for those. Also Enoferm Beta.


----------



## skeenatron (Oct 13, 2017)

skeenatron said:


> I do about 45 different lots of red each year and have had all kinds of MLF results using CH16 bacteria and various yeasts. I've always added bacteria after primary and sometimes it takes off really well and is finished in a week or two. Sometimes it takes two months. Sometimes it never takes off and I have to heat up the barrels and reinoculate. At the end of the day the results have always been fine, although there's always better barrels than others. Hard to pin it on MLF though.
> 
> This year I am going to do a lot of 1/2 regular (post-primary) bacteria inoculation, and 1/2 co-fermentation. I'm hoping I can get quicker, smoother MLFs out of the co-fermentations. I'm in the process of checking my yeasts for compatibility. I'll be sure to post the results later in the season.



Well here are the early results on the side by side, early bacterial inoculation for MLF. These wines have all been pressed and are in the barrel. No sulfur added as neither primary nor secondary fermentations are finished.

Glucose + Fructose (g/100mL)

Walla Walla Merlot no bacteria - 0.003
Walla Walla Merlot early inoculation bacteria - 0.006

Yakima Valley Syrah no bacteria - 0.007
Yakima Valley Syrah early inoculation bacteria - 0.011


Malic acid (g/L)

Walla Walla Merlot no bacteria - 1.061
Walla Walla Merlot early inoculation bacteria - .120

Yakima Valley Syrah no bacteria - 1.335
Yakima Valley Syrah early inoculation bacteria - 0.279


I have three more lots going through the same treatment but the early results are clear. Early MLF inoculation is rad. I have seen no signs of acetic acid production or stank aromas. All yeast and bacterial strains were screened for co-fermentation compatibility beforehand and bacteria was added at about 18 brix. So far I'm sold.


----------



## Johnd (Oct 13, 2017)

skeenatron said:


> Well here are the early results on the side by side, early bacterial inoculation for MLF. These wines have all been pressed and are in the barrel. No sulfur added as neither primary nor secondary fermentations are finished.
> 
> Glucose + Fructose (g/100mL)
> 
> ...



Having been inoculating early with great succes, it's nice to see some empirical evidence, thanks for taking the time to provide your numbers.

Although the difference is insignificant, I note that the sugars are just a smidge higher in the co-inoculated batches vs the ones that were not inoculated. It'll be interesting to see if that holds true across your sampling batches...........


----------



## skeenatron (Oct 13, 2017)

Yeah true they technically are a hair higher currently but since I fermented and pressed the lots individually it could have been a number of factors. Also all the sugar numbers are so close to bone dry anyway it doesn't really matter. The fact that the early inoculation didn't stall anything was very nice to see. Consider me converted John haha!


----------



## Johnd (Oct 13, 2017)

skeenatron said:


> Yeah true they technically are a hair higher currently but since I fermented and pressed the lots individually it could have been a number of factors. Also all the sugar numbers are so close to bone dry anyway it doesn't really matter. The fact that the early inoculation didn't stall anything was very nice to see. Consider me converted John haha!



Agreed, not significant differences in the sugars, but still interesting, we'll see if it holds up.

Glad your early inoculation trials went well. After a ton of reading before giving it a try, and although some of the more technical aspects were challenging to my engineering (non-biology/chemistry) brain, the positives out weighed the negatives. It seemed that as long as the must numbers were in line, and one uses a good / compatible yeast and mlb, nutrient protocol, they can perform their roles in favorable conditions, and concurrently.

Be watching to see how the rest of your concurrent inoculations go, as well as the sequential ones, please keep us posted.......


----------



## ceeaton (Oct 21, 2017)

Johnd said:


> Be watching to see how the rest of your concurrent inoculations go, as well as the sequential ones, please keep us posted.......



Yes, this is a very interesting thread. Keep it up guys, learning can be fun!

Thank you @skeenatron for taking the time to post your numbers.


----------



## pgentile (Oct 24, 2017)

More MLF info:

https://www.extension.iastate.edu/wine/lactic-acid-bacteria-and-wine-spoilage

If the choice is to encourage MLF (and avoid spoilage), then the following recommendations should be followed and MLF must be conducted under controlled conditions. 

1. Use clean, healthy and high acid fruit. 
2. Add a small dose of SO2 at crush. (About 25-30 ppm based on must pH.) 
3. Adjust the must pH if necessary. A pH range of 3.3 to 3.5 is desirable for MLF. Since MLF causes an increase in pH, it is advisable to conduct MLF at the lowest must pH 
as practically possible. 
4. Inoculate the must with a pure starter culture of ML bacteria. The preferred time of inoculation is the 2nd or 3rd day after the alcoholic fermentation has begun. Low 
ethanol, low SO2 and warm fermentation conditions favor MLF. 
5. Take precautions to avoid a stuck fermentation. This would include not using overripe or moldy grapes, using a good dose of vigorously growing, pure culture of yeast, 
adding yeast nutrient and maintaining controlled temperature conditions. Do not allow fermentation temperature to exceed about 30° C or 86° F. 
6. Monitor MLF and as soon as it is completed, treat the wine to prevent further growth of any LAB.

......

SUMMARY 

Lactic acid bacteria are present on grapes, contaminated winery equipment and storage vessels. Some of the LAB primarily decompose malic acid and under certain conditions, attack sugar and malic acid. These are often involved in MLF and rarely in wine spoilage. Certain other LAB grows in low acid conditions; metabolize sugars (pentose), tartaric acid and glycerol. These are more dangerous organisms and cause serious spoilage. Conditions such as moldy fruit, low alcohol, low SO2, high pH (3.5.and above), low acidity, presence of fermentable sugars and warm temperatures such as 25° C (78° F), favor the growth of LAB and can cause wine spoilage. Maintaining an adequate SO2 level, low pH, and sanitary conditions during processing can prevent the spoilage.


----------



## Boatboy24 (Oct 27, 2017)

Picking up my Pinot Noir and Cab Franc today. Malbec and Merlot are pressed and in carboys. I'll add MLB to all four on Sunday.


----------

