Exploring the Effect of Sound on Beer Fermentation Using GC-MS

A joint study by the University of Otago (Dunedin, New Zealand) and the University of Auckland (Auckland, New Zealand) investigated the effect that the particle motion component of audible sound had on beer fermentations using linear actuators (LAT) that predominantly delivered the particle motion component of sound rather than the pressure component. Headspace solid-phase microextraction (HS-SPME) coupled with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) was used to measure the abundance of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the beer samples. A paper based on their research was published in Food Research International (1).

Enhancing the fermentation rate has the potential to improve the efficiency of beer production, provided this is achieved without causing negative effects to the characteristics of the beer (for example, the flavor profile or number of VOCs) (2,3). Previous research has shown that audible sound applied to microbial cultures increased their growth (cell numbers) and fermentation rates. In one study, Saccharomyces cerevisiae (S. cerevisiae) strain VIN13 cultivated aerobically exposed to sound stimuli (high frequency (10 kHz); low frequency, (100 Hz); and broad-band music) at 89 dB, 92 dB, and 80–92 dB demonstrated a 12% increase in growth rate compared to the control without sound (4).

Exposing S. cerevisiae MTCC-170 to Indian classical music at a frequency range of 41–645 Hz and intensity 95–110 dB increased biomass (1.703 ± 0.015 OD₆₆₀) and production of alcohol (2.460 ± 0.005 %v/v) compared to controls ferments (1.633 ± 0.005 OD₆₆₀; 2.190 ± 0.005 %v/v) (5). Another study exposed S. cerevisiae-170 to two other types of Indian classical music (172–581 Hz; 70–90 dB and 86–839 Hz; 85–110 dB) enhanced its biomass and metabolite concentrations compared to controls (6). However, results from different studies in the literature vary and the need exists to further investigate the effect of sound on beer fermentation with well controlled sound delivery, which motivated the researchers to conduct the study (1).

As mentioned earlier, HS-SPME coupled with GC/MS was used to measure relative abundance of VOCs in the beer samples analyzed in the pair of experiments conducted in the study. The VOC data for experiment #1 were derived from six measurements (3 fermentation replicates × 2 analytical replicates), whereas experiment #2 had twelve measurements (3 fermentation replicates × 4 analytical replicates) for both sound stimulation and control treatments. The VOC profile during fermentation was determined in experiment #1 and #2 based on the relevance of the VOC produced to yeast metabolism and fermentation, which included measuring hop derived compounds. A total of 33 VOCs were selected from experiment #1 for investigation, including 17 esters, 5 higher alcohols (HAs), 3 organic acids (OAs), 6 terpenoids and 2 ketones. In experiment #2, a broader range of esters were investigated, with a total of 37 VOCs selected, including 22 esters, 6 HAs, 3 OAs and 4 terpenoids. Of the 17 esters detected in experiment #1, 13 compounds were ethyl esters and four were acetate esters. In experiment #2, 16 ethyl esters and 6 acetate esters were identified (1).

The researchers wrote that their findings indicate that applying audible sound via a LAT, which impacted primarily on particle motion rather than the pressure component of audible sound, kept more viable yeast in suspension and significantly decreased beer fermentation time compared to control fermentations. The effects of sound delivered by LATs resulted in the fermentations reaching a terminal gravity 21–31 h earlier than the control ferments. Despite some subtle differences in the VOC profile being observed during fermentation, the LAT application of audible sound had little overall effect on the abundance of selected VOCs that were considered the most important components of beer flavor, particularly at the end of fermentation. These results suggest, therefore, that the addition of sound via LATs may be a way to increase the rate of beer fermentation without altering beer flavor, which may potentially improve the efficiency of the brewing industry owing to reduced production times. In addition, the researchers state that this approach might be applied to improve the efficiency of other industrial fermentation processes (1).

References

1. Adadi, P.; Harris, A.; Bremer, P. et al. Audible Sound Decreased Beer Fermentation Time with Minimal Effects on the Abundance of Volatile Organic Compound Production. Food Res. Int. 2025, 212, 116427. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodres.2025.116427

2. Kucharczyk, K.; Tuszyński, T. The Effect of Temperature on Fermentation and Beer Volatiles at an Industrial Scale. J. Inst. Brew.2018, 124 (3), 230-235. DOI: 10.1002/jib.491

3. Landaud, S.; Latrille, E.; Corrieu, G. Top Pressure and Temperature Control the Fusel Alcohol/Ester Ratio Through Yeast Growth in Beer Fermentation. J. Inst. Brew.2001, 107 (2), 107-117. DOI: 10.1002/j.2050-0416.2001.tb00083.x

4. Aggio, R. B. M.; Obolonkin, V.; Villas-Bôas. S. G. Sonic Vibration Affects the Metabolism of Yeast Cells Growing in Liquid Culture: A Metabolomic Study. Metabolomics2012, 8 (4), 670-678. DOI: 10.1007/s11306-011-0360-x

5. Sarvaiya, N.; Kothari, V. Audible Sound in Form of Music Can Influence Microbial Growth, Metabolism and Antibiotic Susceptibility. JABB 2017, 2 (6), 212-219. DOI: 10.15406/jabb.2017.02.00048

6. Shah, A.; Raval, A.; Kothari, V. Sound Stimulation Can Influence Microbial Growth and Production of Certain Key Metabolites. JMBFS2016, 2021, 330-334. DOI: 10.15414/jmbfs.2016.5.4.330-334