Give up those secrets!

[laguna]

If I remember correctly a dog's sense of smell is around 10,000 to 100,000 times more sensitive than man's dependent on the dog's breed.

I understand it can be up to 100,000 times more sensitive than mans too depending on breed.

Fish dont 'smell' as such geoff as you know, at least not how we do in the air, its how we relate to it as anglers, flavour and smell are related senses but fish detect by their chemoreceptors, chemical signals are simply carried in a watery environment, hence the importance of solubility imo.

Nicepix do you have any reference to fishes ability which suggests it is less than a dogs ability to smell/detect these chemicals? Again it depends on species as i posted up in another thread somewhere sharks can detect blood hundreds of miles away (some say thousands), freshwater native species not so much. Any info gratefully received.

Spicy flavours Graham contain significant amounts of essential minerals. The electrolytes (so called because they conduct electricity in water) are detectable by fish that seek them. Even though some processes will ruin a good bait the minerals cannot be destroyed, only changed from an organic to an inorganic by excessive high heat processing.

 

[S-Kippy]

I am in total awe of your combined brainy-ness [is that a word ?] & staggering understanding of the science. Sadly I dont get any of it...perhaps I should have paid more attention at school.

So...ever on the lookout for anything that will give me an advantage over the Bury Hill zeds what "flavour/additive" might enhance a deadbait ? Predators may be predominantly sight feeders but not the OBH zeds...not exclusively. They do a lot of creeping around picking up fish chunks after dark so scent must play a part somehow surely ? And they are perfectly capable of identifying what bait you are on & utterly ignoring it in preference for something else. They switch on and off certain baits almost overnight. This year you cannot buy a run on a bit of roach at the moment. In a fortnight's time anything other than roach could be steadfastly ignored.

Not pineapple or blue cheese please !mg:

 

[binka]

I am in total awe of your combined brainy-ness [is that a word ?] & staggering understanding of the science. Sadly I dont get any of it...perhaps I should have paid more attention at school.

So...ever on the lookout for anything that will give me an advantage over the Bury Hill zeds what "flavour/additive" might enhance a deadbait ? Predators may be predominantly sight feeders but not the OBH zeds...not exclusively. They do a lot of creeping around picking up fish chunks after dark so scent must play a part somehow surely ?

Not pineapple or blue cheese please !mg:

I've heard and read that eel oil is supposed to be the thing Skip although I've used it (still got most of it) and can't honestly say I've noticed a difference, someone (can't remember who but will post up the link if/when it comes to me) did quite an extensive trial fishing two rods over a prolonged period of time, one with unscented and one with an oiled bait an the oiled caught far more fish.

There's also the sardine oil amongst others, I've got a bottle somewhere but haven't gotton around to trying it as yet.

 

[aebitim]

Just googled chemoreceptors in fish and have come across several references to olfactory glands in fish.
Fully agree with the texture etc playing a big part though.

 

[geoffmaynard]

Chemoreceptors - receivers of chemical stimulation? Like a human's tongue? As I said, smell has nothing, or very very little, to do with how fish react to bait as the liquid environment is not suited to transmitting scents. The chemical receptors will be what we consider to be tastebuds. Anything else is not logical and to think 'smell' is anthropomorthic. Fish have nostrils but they use them for detecting taste, I'll bet. Think of that metallic coin-taste again. It's another reason to use coated hooks.
Not that I 'know' anything, it's just something I decided from reasoning years ago and nobody has ever persuaded me differently.

 

[laguna]

Not pineapple or blue cheese please !

are you sure?

A frozen deadbait Skip is 'almost' the perfect bait - a fresh one better - a live one best? totally void of artificial flavours mostly, though some anglers seems to favour pred plus? as an additive. Agree about a roach bait, its the one little fish that can be caught in extreme cold weather conditions and is often targeted by match anglers, maybe the pike know that they are around and become preoccupied with them once we have a bit of frost/ice around, other species don't tolerate cold too well so tend hide it out.

In my limited experience of predator fishing I find a wobbled bait works best in autumn, sink and draw and a static in the height of winter. Flavour wise? none keep it natural would be my advice, just try different deadbaits but dont just stick with freshwater species, seafish deads contain more essential minerals. Alternatively you try adding un-purified seasalt?

ps you forgot the banana!!!
(they contain high levels of potassium) :wh

---------- Post added at 23:33 ---------- Previous post was at 23:14 ----------

Chemoreceptors - receivers of chemical stimulation? Like a human's tongue? As I said, smell has nothing, or very very little, to do with how fish react to bait as the liquid environment is not suited to transmitting scents. The chemical receptors will be what we consider to be tastebuds. Anything else is not logical and to think 'smell' is anthropomorthic. Fish have nostrils but they use them for detecting taste, I'll bet. Think of that metallic coin-taste again. It's another reason to use coated hooks.
Not that I 'know' anything, it's just something I decided from reasoning years ago and nobody has ever persuaded me differently.

Anglers only refer to it as 'smell' because 'olfaction' is sometimes difficult to comprehend in other terms Geoff as you know. They do have what looks like nostrils called nares, smell, or olfaction is an important sense for many fish. Those little holes that look like nostrils pass through a chamber of sensory pads, key to a strong sense of smell for fish is the ability to move water rapidly over these sensory pads.
Agree about the coin analogy, the metals from hooks can deter fish due to the nobility of different metals reacting from leads, zinc swivels etc. they 'Conduct' in the dirty water and covering them will help.

 

[Tee-Cee]

Excellent stuff and easy for the non-tech/scientific man to follow......good discussion as well...........

 

[S-Kippy]

Excellent stuff and easy for the non-tech/scientific man to follow......good discussion as well...........

Not sure "easy" is quite the word I'd choose.

I think I will stick to my unadulterated deadbaits. I have tried "Predator Plus" which seems to do no harm but no noticeable good either. The pike seem to like it but I am trying to avoid those damned things. Played about with winterised oils too but user friendly they most certainly are not. Ended up covered in the stuff and reeking like a crab pot.

As in most things bait quality makes the biggest difference IMO. A section of fresh,bloody sardine will outfish any piece of frozen Peruvian mummy that's been in a tackle shop freezer for 2 years ! I'd just like to try and get a bigger "scent/taste signature" round my small baits.

 

[binka]

Credit where credit's due and congratulation on "Thread of the Month" Graham.

There's some really interesting comments here and it's beginning to prompt some fresh views for me on certain types of baits with regard to taste, smell and texture.

I'm thinking along the lines now that instead of smells being transmitted through water it's actually taste that's transmitted in the way that a fish interprets them and solubility is an appeal in itself that will aid digestibility which in turn is often recognised by the fish through the texture of the bait?

 

[tiinker]

I have fished from the age of seven that was 1953 I have never had a break from fishing. I fish coarse game and salt. In all the years I have fished I have never come across a additive that has made that much if any difference to my catch rate. Some of my friends have been in the fore front of bait development since the early sixties. They have spent fortunes and thousands of hours and have had good seasons and bad seasons. There may have been little extras that may have given a slight edge for a short period. But I have never known anything that really set the sky alight. It is interesting to try different things but with some it is almost a obsession. I honestly believe that the best way to increase your catch rate is to study your quarry and its environment and leave the additives and potions well alone.

Has anyone ever used POL VITAMO and found it to their advantage.

 

[Graham Elliott 1]

Thanks Binka.
Im really looking for first bite of the month after 5 hours without on the kennet so far.

Meat. Source or pellet not doing the business yet.

Wheres that bit of sponge I soaked in blue cheese dip gone?

 

[laguna]

I'm sure there's lots more secrets to 'give up' Graham.... :wh
Unfortunately I dont understand everything either, lets face it most of us are anglers just trying to make sense of it all!!!

anyone for anymore?

or should we just give up and go fishing? mg:

 

[geoffmaynard]

The dozens of times someone has broken open a boilie and invited me to 'sniff that'... Whereapon I get on my hobby horse and upset someone else !

 

[laguna]

I'd just like to try and get a bigger "scent/taste signature" round my small baits.

Chum?

Seems to work for pike, maybe liquidised with minute particles filtered for the Zed's?

---------- Post added at 16:45 ---------- Previous post was at 16:40 ----------

The dozens of times someone has broken open a boilie and invited me to 'sniff that'... Whereapon I get on my hobby horse and upset someone else !

I know exactly what you mean. It makes me laugh when anglers smell those glugs in tackle shops too!

 

[nicepix]

Laguna,
I haven't got the books I used for my research having passed them on to another dog handler when I left that department. From memory the book gave a table of the numbers of scent receptors in various species including minnows, trout, carp and catfish. The authors rated the ability to detect scent based purely on the number of receptors as there are no machines yet that can replicate an animal's ability to discriminate between scent. One interesting point, well fascinating I think is that no matter whether a track is 10 minutes or 10 hours old, on grass or concrete the dog knows which direction it goes and will always follow in the right direction. How on earth do they manage that?

The discussion about scent .v. taste is far too deep for my limited intellect. And, I wasn't particularly interested in that aspect as it was purely the scent aspect that I was interested in. As a layman I think that a fish such as a barbel (fish) that has extended barbels (anatomy) used to taste food and also has nostrils, may be able to differentiate between taste and scent as we can. Taste involves actually touching something allowing the transference of chemicals to sensors on the barbels, smell being particles of chemicals carried in the water that are passed over sensors in the fish's nasal chamber. Of course this might be totally or partially incorrect as some species appear to use their barbels or other similar attachments to capture passing scent.

In a practical sense I believe that fish need different diets at different times of year. They have the ability to locate the food items even at extremely small dilutions of scent or taste and will hunt it down. They are not adversely affected by carriers or other additives used if there is something in the mix that they want or need. That is only my opinion. Feel free to disagree.

And Geoff, following your comments about tasting metal; have you ever considered that the taste of a metal hook could be the thing that puts wary fish off? That is the one thing common to every bait recipe

 

[S-Kippy]

Chum?

Seems to work for pike, maybe liquidised with minute particles filtered for the Zed's?

Yes...but I'm still thinking of the best way to deliver it that wont add unwanted resistance. Nor do I want to attract a load of bream and I dread to think how many of those damned thing are in OBH. Big Phil had two yesterday...both on sardine.

 

[clive morton]

i really think there is something in spicy baits by way of attraction people coating meat in spices and lightly frying it to toughen it up a bit seems to have a following.
carp and barbel seem to have a liking for spicy baits i have caught carp and barbel on pepperami both the normal and the hot one.
i remember years a go using rod hutchinsons ultra spice in one of his books he called it the business he had that much confidence in it.
i used it on a carp water and the fish where ripping up the bottom for it and crapping it out in the weigh sling a sure sign they where switched on to it this was after just a light bit of prebaiting dont know if you can still get hold of it but if you can i think i may try it for barbel im sure it would be a winner.

 

[Sean Meeghan]

Worms!

And, sorry Chris, electrolytes are pretty much by definition inorganic. An electrolyte is just a substance that forms ions when dissolved in water. In modern nutritional parlance an electrolyte is simply a mineral added to water to replace minerals lost in sweating.

 

[Graham Elliott 1]

Anglingbaitclub.co.uk | Fishing Bait | Live Bait | Worm Juice - LIQUIDS

Xmas pressie sorted thanks Sean.

 

[laguna]

From memory the book gave a table of the numbers of scent receptors in various species including minnows, trout, carp and catfish. The authors rated the ability to detect scent based purely on the number of receptors as there are no machines yet that can replicate an animal's ability to discriminate between scent.

Thanks for that. Obviously with no machine its hard to say if those receptors are superior or inferior to a dogs. I have read many conflicting research papers, mostly American stuff that suggests some freshwater species have abilities approaching 1M times more than humans which is staggeringly incomprehensible.

Extended barbels (anatomy), they do use them for touch (and navigation through weed, similar to how dogs and cats use whiskers) and taste, foraging. This is confirmed by science. They dont necessarily have to 'touch' a bait to know what it is, but being close to it certainly helps in determining what it consists of.

In a practical sense I believe that fish need different diets at different times of year. They have the ability to locate the food items even at extremely small dilutions of scent or taste and will hunt it down. They are not adversely affected by carriers or other additives used if there is something in the mix that they want or need. That is only my opinion. Feel free to disagree.

I agree with your first point mostly but disagree with second.
Fish do have different requirements but its much more varied than different times of the year, season or temperature. It can be from day to day and hour to hour. It explains why you will catch one day using x brand of pellet or boilie and then totally ignore it the next. This is not always a learned trait to avoid capture, but a real need for a particular nutrient at a specific moment in time. When they have had their fill they will move on. A change of bait would be my advice.

I believe they ARE adversely affected by certain carriers, especially if that carrier (artificial) is recognised as danger/foreign and has masked what it is they seek. They may risk taking the bait if the overriding urge to feed is great enough given no good alternative (and can detect/contains what they want) but I believe you are relying on being able to overcome its fear in many respects. A artificial additive will arouse curiosity and draw fish to your baited area but then it would be pure luck in my opinion as to whether they are confident in taking the hook bait. If they recognise danger by associated and learning they will simply avoid it in preference to a natural, untainted real-food bait. We have all witnessed the bloke in the next peg catching more than us (this bloke seems to follow me around quite a bit), even using the same bait but then its down to method, skill and presentation.

---------- Post added at 22:58 ---------- Previous post was at 22:42 ----------

Worms!

And, sorry Chris, electrolytes are pretty much by definition inorganic. An electrolyte is just a substance that forms ions when dissolved in water. In modern nutritional parlance an electrolyte is simply a mineral added to water to replace minerals lost in sweating.

An electrolyte can be from a dissolved organic or inorganic salt. It can also be from reaction with water.
You will get a chemical reaction from an organic or inorganic. Add bicarb to sulphur for example and it will fizz. In close proximity it will conduct in water.