## 3 Results and Discussion
### Storage-Related Haze Changes  
The NABs produced and filtered in this study were not subjected to stabilization treatments. Haze formation in beer is predominantly influenced by two major components--(I) proteins and (II) tannins (polyphenols) [11; 64]--both of which in combination tend to increase over time during storage. To mitigate this effect, adsorption techniques utilizing colloidal silica or bentonite can be employed to remove proteins, while polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVPP) is effective in stabilizing beer by reducing polyphenol content [11; 64]. In this study, NABs were stored at a controlled temperature of 4 \({}^{\circ}\)C for a duration of two weeks, with periodic monitoring of turbidity changes (start/1 week/2 weeks). According to the established literature on haze development in full-strength beers, an increase in turbidity over time is generally expected [11; 64]. For all NABs produced and filtered, the changes in turbidity were tracked at both one and two weeks of storage (Table 3). A comparison of different yeast strains and filtration approaches revealed distinct trends in haze formation. Specifically, NABs fermented with LA-01 and LoNa, which exhibited the highest initial turbidity (39.3 EBC and 71.5 EBC, respectively) when filtered with AF 11, displayed different behaviors over the two-week period. The non-flocculent yeast strain LA-01 [27] showed a continuous increase in turbidity, aligning with the expected trend based on previous research [11; 64]. Conversely, LoNa, which possesses medium flocculation and sedimentation properties [28], initially experienced a decline in haze levels after one week, likely due to sedimentation effects. However, turbidity began to rise again after an additional week of storage. This fluctuation indicates a dynamic interplay between sedimentation and subsequent resuspension of haze-forming compounds, suggesting that medium-flocculent yeasts can contribute to variable turbidity patterns over time. Haze development is influenced by both pH and ethanol content [65], which helps explain the more intense haziness observed in the LA-01 and LoNa beers. These beers had ethanol levels of 0.53% ABV (LA-01) and 0.56% ABV (LoNa) with corresponding pH values of 4.40 and 4.36, respectively. In contrast, the W-34/70 beer exhibited a higher ethanol content of 2.33% ABV and a lower pH of 3.99. The reduced haze formation observed with the AF 31-AF 101 filter sheets in the W-34/70 samples can thus be attributed to these differences in ethanol concentration and pH. These findings warrant cautious interpretation, particularly in the context of beers displaying elevated initial turbidity levels. In practical brewing scenarios, such beers would typically undergo additional processing steps to enhance clarity and stability. Meanwhile, the NAB produced with W-34/70 and filtered with AF 11 exhibited a markedly different trend. Initially, this beer had a very low turbidity reading of 1.28 EBC, appearing visually clear [18]. However, over time, an increase in haze formation was observed, with turbidity rising to 4.02 EBC after two weeks. This finding is consistent with previous studies, as W-34/70 was not stabilized against protein- or polyphenol-induced haze formation [11; 64]. The increase in turbidity suggests that, even in cases where initial haze levels are low, long-term stability can still be a concern if stabilization measures are not applied.