Troutnut Forum

>

Fly Fishing

> Yes or No?

Falsifly	April 6th, 2009, 7:44 pm
Hayward, WI. Posts: 661	Just curious what you think. Is it in there or not?
	Falsifly When asked what I just caught that monster on I showed him. He put on his magnifiers and said, "I can't believe they can see that."
Troutnut	April 6th, 2009, 11:40 pm
Administrator Bellevue, WA Posts: 2737	It's not in there! But there sure is a lot there for a thing with no it there.
	Jason Neuswanger, Ph.D. Troutnut and salmonid ecologist
GONZO	April 7th, 2009, 2:06 am
Site Editor "Bear Swamp," PA Posts: 1681	Itless Exuvium Although it's rather hard to tell, This seems to be an empty shell. And judging from the vacant stare, I think that it is not in there. There seems to be a dorsal cleft, And so I'd say that it has left.
Taxon	April 7th, 2009, 2:30 am
Site Editor Royse City, TX Posts: 1350	Oh, now I get it.
	Best regards, Roger Rohrbeck www.FlyfishingEntomology.com
GONZO	April 7th, 2009, 2:57 am
Site Editor "Bear Swamp," PA Posts: 1681	Roger, "It" happens! In this "case"--as Bill Clinton might say--it depends on what the definition of "it" is. ;)
Taxon	April 7th, 2009, 3:22 am
Site Editor Royse City, TX Posts: 1350	Gonzo- Thanks.
	Best regards, Roger Rohrbeck www.FlyfishingEntomology.com
Konchu	April 7th, 2009, 8:57 am
Site Editor Indiana Posts: 505	If the flight's on, nobody's home.
Falsifly	April 7th, 2009, 9:03 am
Hayward, WI. Posts: 661	Ex Exuvium Through dorsal cleft, I have emerged, Passing from a life, now purged. Taking flight, where once I swam, Another world, from which I am.
	Falsifly When asked what I just caught that monster on I showed him. He put on his magnifiers and said, "I can't believe they can see that."
Troutnut	April 7th, 2009, 12:44 pm
Administrator Bellevue, WA Posts: 2737	There once was a nymph from the Nam who wanted to go on the lam. He said, "what the hell!" and shucked off his shell and -- uh oh -- a trout! Damn!
	Jason Neuswanger, Ph.D. Troutnut and salmonid ecologist
Shawnny3	April 7th, 2009, 1:38 pm
Moderator Pleasant Gap, PA Posts: 1197	A serious question: Do trout feed on shucks? -Shawn
	Jewelry-Quality Artistic Salmon Flies, by Shawn Davis www.davisflydesigns.com
Troutnut	April 7th, 2009, 2:46 pm
Administrator Bellevue, WA Posts: 2737	Probably not intentionally, but I'm sure they mistake quite a few for "it."
	Jason Neuswanger, Ph.D. Troutnut and salmonid ecologist
Shawnny3	April 8th, 2009, 10:00 am
Moderator Pleasant Gap, PA Posts: 1197	I was just thinking that, since many shucks quite similar, a good shuck-imitating fly might be productive during a variety of hatches... if fish feed on them, that is. I presumed what Jason stated, that fish mistakenly take them (can't imagine there's much nutrition in them), but I also wonder if fish learn to avoid them unless they look much like the corresponding nymph. -Shawn
	Jewelry-Quality Artistic Salmon Flies, by Shawn Davis www.davisflydesigns.com
GONZO	April 8th, 2009, 10:40 am
Site Editor "Bear Swamp," PA Posts: 1681	Shawn, Although the standard way of imitating shucks on dry mayfly emergers looks much the same (usually just a shapeless clump of synthetic fibers), this is not true of the actual mayfly shucks. To the extent that trout take shucks, it is probably because the shucks so closely resemble the actual nymph. Like stonefly shucks, most mayfly shucks retain most of the shape, appearance, and dark markings of the nymph. The main difference (other than having no "it" there) would be a degree of translucency. That would seem to be a possible way for the trout to distinguish between them rather than something to imitate. In order to be successful, I would think that a "shuck-imitating" fly (one that imitates only the shuck) would look no different than a nymph-imitating fly.
Patcrisci	April 8th, 2009, 11:34 am
Lagrangeville, NY Posts: 119	The Trout's Retort It was, alas, a fleeting glimpse. I saw and thought it was a nymph! I tipped my jaw and took, then sensed at once the empty shuck. Duped by a voided shell I curse my luck, yet thankful am I for the lifeless thing. It's better far than feather, hook and sting.
	Pat Crisci
GONZO	April 8th, 2009, 12:00 pm
Site Editor "Bear Swamp," PA Posts: 1681	Nice, Pat! (Though I worry that the "Perfesser" might be feeling a haiku coming on, and I wouldn't want him to break the longstanding ban on 575s) :)
CaseyP	April 8th, 2009, 1:30 pm
Arlington, VA/ Mercersburg, PA Posts: 653	(can't imagine there's much nutrition in them)--Shawnny 'way back in biology class we were told that such things as insect cases were a form of protein that other animals might eat. was that science as accurate as some other pronouncements from that bygone era?
	"You can observe a lot by watching." Yogi Berra
GONZO	April 8th, 2009, 1:40 pm
Site Editor "Bear Swamp," PA Posts: 1681	I don't know, Casey. But it makes me wonder about the times when I've seen the surface virtually blanketed with nymph shucks after a Hexagenia hatch. I've never seen a fish feeding on them, though the fish might have already been stuffed by gorging on the ones that were full of "it."
Konchu	April 8th, 2009, 2:10 pm
Site Editor Indiana Posts: 505	at least some fish have chemicals in their digestive tracts that would allow them to process the exuviae, but i dont know if it'd be worth the effort when other high energy foods are there
Shawnny3	April 8th, 2009, 2:35 pm
Moderator Pleasant Gap, PA Posts: 1197	Casey, I just did a little poking around, and it seems the exoskeletons are made of chitin (probably knew that from biology class at some point, the day before I forgot it), which is a polysaccharide similar to cellulose (the sugar that makes up most of the structural components in plants). I'm guessing that it's impossible for trout to break down to the monosaccharide level and hence has little to no nutritional value to them. In light of Konchu's comment, they probably break it down to some point so that the nutrients inside might be drawn out, but I would highly doubt the exoskeleton itself provides them with much energy. Lloyd, I know that the shucks look much like the original nymphs in terms of general outline, but I've noticed in my investigations that they are not the same color at all, but instead are essentially black and transparent with a lot of mottling (of course, my investigations are pretty limited - I'm sure not all of them are like that). During a hatch in which the hatching nymphs are of many different colors, it seems that the shuck color might be easier to consistently imitate than the nymph colors. Also, after many of the nymphs have hatched and shucks outnumber nymphs in the water by a large margin, I wonder if the fish might be fooled into thinking a hatch of shucks is going on which dwarfs the actual hatch. A fish so fooled might fall better for a fly with the markings of the shuck than for the real thing - or at least that's my unlikely hypothesis. What's more likely, of course, is what you suggested, that the markings on the shucks may be triggers that alert the fish that it's fake and the fish might therefore selectively ignore them as a result. But if the fish are simply tuned into the most prolific bug-looking thing floating downstream, then the shuck fly might produce. Even if the fish doesn't actually eat shucks but expels them after mouthing them, that behavior would still be enough for the fisherman to find success. Basically, it comes down to how smart or conditioned fish are in terms of what they decide to put in their mouths. And if they routinely mouth our crude imitations, it's possible that they put lots of food-looking things into their mouths. Though it's a long shot, I'm intrigued enough by the possibility that I might just try to develop a shuck pattern for testing. I would develop and test it in the name of science, of course, lest my wife suspect that my routine abscondings to the stream are for my own personal satisfaction. -Shawn
	Jewelry-Quality Artistic Salmon Flies, by Shawn Davis www.davisflydesigns.com
Martinlf	April 8th, 2009, 3:16 pm
Moderator Palmyra PA Posts: 3233	Gonzo, you're right. I'm just in the middle of a lot of academic busy work, and only have time for a peek at the board from time to time, but I was contemplating a little civil disobedience the last time I glanced at this thread.
	"He spread them a yard and a half. 'And every one that got away is this big.'" --Fred Chappell

Quick Reply

Related Discussions

Title	Replies	Last Reply
Re: shuck and belly In Male Baetis Mayfly Dun by Martinlf	2	Dec 27, 2006 by Martinlf
Re: Trailing Shuck In Baetis Mayfly Nymph by Baetis7	1	Aug 20, 2014 by Entoman
Re: Spatsizi In General Discussion by Spatsizi	1	Sep 15, 2006 by Troutnut
no hatch In General Discussion by Artk	0
Ecdyonurus nymphs In Ecdyonurus criddlei Mayfly Nymph by Jmw975	0
Re: I'm back In General Discussion by Wbranch	6	Apr 2, 2022 by Oldredbarn
Hexagenia Limbata (Hex) Nymph in Captivity In the Insect Order Ephemeroptera by Hdhungryman	0
Re: Emergers In General Discussion by Martinlf	3	Apr 20, 2007 by Riverratben
Re: Hatching of Early Black Stoneflies In General Discussion by Zugbuggin	1	Mar 9, 2012 by Wiflyfisher
Re: stupid question In Male Baetis bicaudatus Mayfly Nymph by Brian314	2	Feb 27, 2022 by Brian314

Troutnut.com is copyright © 2004-2024 Jason Neuswanger (email Jason). See my FAQ for information about use of my images. privacy policy