Troutnut.com Fly Fishing for Trout Home
User Password
or register.
Scientific name search:

> > UV Tying Materials - does this really make sense ?

GearTheoryMay 5th, 2013, 9:32 pm
Indianapolis

Posts: 12
Seeing all this UV material in the shops I got a little curious and started reading. I even got the book Scientific Angling and I even did that after reading multiple scientific findings that Salmonoid species loose their UV rods as they mature and only gain them back during spawning. These seemed like very credible sources.

Scientific Angling states that Trout have UV vision and therefore we need to understand how everything looks UV. I am skeptical but could not post a reply to overmywaders.com to get his comment.

So I asked some very accomplished fisherman here locally. These are guys that have spent the time researching trout behavior not just talking about it. His comment was that UV reflectance can generally affect the visibility of objects, more so at certain times of day than others. That means that some colors, blue for example are smart choices for nymphs mid-day in deeper water where UV penetrates and MAY contribute to the overall visibility of the pattern.

Personally I currently think I might have wasted 20 bucks on the book.

Any other thoughts on this UV mumbo jumbo ?? The adult fish we cast over "aint got no" UV Rods so what's the point really ?

Thing is I really like how the light catches some of this stuff and am using it ... but I think for its ability to scatter light..

Gear & Theory
GearTheoryMay 5th, 2013, 10:11 pm
Indianapolis

Posts: 12
More..

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0042698987901246

" Microspectrophotometric analysis of the visual receptors of “yearling” brown trout, Salmo trutta, revealed three cone types, double cones with visual pigments absorbing maximally at about 600 and 535 nm, and two types of single cone withλmax at about 440 and 355 nm. Two-year-old fish did not possess the u.v. cone cells. Microscopical analysis of the cone mosaic in “yearling” trout showed a square pattern of double cones with a central single cone and corner single cones, but in two-year-old trout the corner cones were absent. It is concluded that u.v. sensitivity is derived from the corner cones of the mosaic, and that it is only present in young trout."
Gear & Theory
EntomanMay 5th, 2013, 10:19 pm
Northern CA & ID

Posts: 2604
Hi Mikey,

There's a lot of confusion on this topic out there. We really went 'round and 'round on this a short while ago in a very long thread, including participation from the author himself. It covered both UV and fluorescence. Click on this link and get back to us with your thoughts.
http://www.troutnut.com/topic/7879/UV-spectrum-and-trout
"It's not that I find fishing so important, it's just that I find all other endeavors of Man equally unimportant... And not nearly as much fun!" Robert Traver, Anatomy of a Fisherman
EntomanMay 5th, 2013, 10:29 pm
Northern CA & ID

Posts: 2604
Ah! I was posting when you were.... Thanks for the article! I'll make it a link for you.

Paul, it appears you are vindicated about the lack of UV vision in adult salmonids.
"It's not that I find fishing so important, it's just that I find all other endeavors of Man equally unimportant... And not nearly as much fun!" Robert Traver, Anatomy of a Fisherman
BrookymanMay 5th, 2013, 10:31 pm
Banned
Posts: 797
If you match the true colors of a genus / specie as I do PH is truly not relevant. I worked through that platform in the 80's and found that it has great value for the person that has only tied flies by the means of traditional formulation. I posted a thread that you should take a peek at call the strike zone of trout in a stream. And one before that regarding color reproduction of exact species. If you match the true color of a nymph it will look as the real does at any depth. If it matches it matches and what the fish see regarding PH is then eliminated and irrelevant to the problem at hand.

http://www.troutnut.com/topic/7960/This-post-will-change-your-life-foreververy-important-COLOR-information

This link is for part one theories of perfect color.


Mack.
Banned for threatening another user and then trying to circumvent a kinder "soft" ban with fake accounts
EntomanMay 5th, 2013, 10:52 pm
Northern CA & ID

Posts: 2604
Mack,

Many came to the same conclusions years ago. Wished they were right, as it would certainly make things a lot simpler.:)

Read the same link I posted for Mikey. In the middle of it are a few posts traded between us addressing the issue of how visible color is perceived/responded to as well.
"It's not that I find fishing so important, it's just that I find all other endeavors of Man equally unimportant... And not nearly as much fun!" Robert Traver, Anatomy of a Fisherman
GearTheoryMay 6th, 2013, 8:05 am
Indianapolis

Posts: 12
Entoman,

I did not see any reply I could identify as the author of Scientific Angling nor did anyone seem to address the question directly. Do adult trout see UV.
Further I am confused how the PH reference snuck in?

But... I do think it is probably useful to understand how our flies look to us under UV conditions as that is all that penetrates in deeper water and in low light conditions it may tell us something.

I found an srticle on SexyLoops that left me with the impression that contrast is important, perhaps more important than UV or VIS color. So my thinking is that one would need to make sure that they use contrasting colors in terms of UV for wet flies especially.

All those photos of materials under UV would be really useful if they were captured with normal vision equipment (no UV filter). That way we could see how they appear to the trouts normal VIS.
Gear & Theory
OvermywaderMay 6th, 2013, 10:26 am
Posts: 31The results of the 1987 study above have been modified since that date as researchers found that mature salmonids have UV cones still present in the dorso-temporal region of the retina. One researcher in the field thinks these are blue cones, but even he admits that it is of no moment as all of the RGB cones have a secondary peak in the ultraviolet that gives them ultraviolet vision. Also, the rods at night are more sensitive to UV than to visible light.

Here is one quote:

Ultraviolet visual sensitivity appears to be reduced and, possibly, lost during smoltification in anadromous populations of salmonid fishes. Similar changes occur in non-anadromous salmonids over a mass range that is associated with smoltification in their anadromous conspecifics. However, in sexually mature adult salmonids, ultraviolet-sensitive cones are present in the dorso-temporal retina, suggesting that ultraviolet sensitivity (i) may be regained with sexual maturity or (ii) might never be completely lost.
from Functional mapping of ultraviolet photosensitivity during metamorphic transitions in a salmonid fish, Oncorhynchus mykiss
Mark E. Deutschlander*, Danielle K. Greaves, Theodore J. Haimberger and Craig W. Hawryshyn 2001Functional mapping of ultraviolet photosensitivity during metamorphic transitions in a salmonid fish, Oncorhynchus mykiss

and another
The most parsimonious explanation for the data is that UVS cones degenerated and UVS cones were regenerated from intrinsic retinal progenitor cells. Regenerating UVS cones were functionally integrated such that they were able to elicit electrical responses from second-order neurons. This is the first report of cones regenerating during natural development. Both the death and regeneration of cones in retinae represent novel mechanisms for tuning visual systems to new visual tasks or environments.
from Degeneration and regeneration of ultraviolet cone photoreceptors during development in rainbow trout
W. Ted Allison†, Stephen G. Dann‡, Kathy M. Veldhoen, Craig W. Hawryshyn§*
Article first published online: 17 OCT 2006
Journal of Comparative Neurology Vol 499 Issue 5

As you can see in the image below, the secondary peaks of the cones provide plenty of UV input, especially at dawn and dusk, when the percentage of UV solar increases.


Personally, I don't think you wasted your money. :)

Regards,
Reed
Regards,
Reed

Overmywaders
GearTheoryMay 6th, 2013, 10:30 am
Indianapolis

Posts: 12
Awesome... thanks... was looking for verification..
Gear & Theory
OldredbarnMay 6th, 2013, 12:48 pm
Novi, MI

Posts: 2591
Mr GearTheory ;) in a couple weeks here we can show your UV experiment to some old sulky Brown and see what he thinks...We'll present it to him in low light :)...Real low light.

If we are lucky we may run into some Light Hennies...Maybe like that one year James and I were upstream of Daisey Bend and couldn't open our mouths without swallowing a half dozen of the little critters! On our caps, in our ears, on our rods, and all over the stick-boat...I would make a cast and my fraud would land between 6-8 naturals...Impossible competition. We waited it all out and then when it was petering out, went head hunting! Yahoo!!!

If you hear a loud scream, don't be alarmed...It's just Spence crossing the Crawford County line. ;)
"Even when my best efforts fail it's a satisfying challenge, and that, after all, is the essence of fly fishing." -Chauncy Lively

"Envy not the man who lives beside the river, but the man the river flows through." Joseph T Heywood
PaulRobertsMay 6th, 2013, 1:30 pm
Colorado

Posts: 1776
I can't speak to this bc, as I said before, I'm just not up on the latest. I'd have a lot of reading and chatting with old friends to do before I could say much of use.

I read Mr's Curry's book and can only say that it's interesting. Whether it can be put to good practical use remains to be seen, or not (pun intended).

Just for clarity, the last graph provided above is for cichlids, not for rainbow trout. And apparently such cones are not ubiquitous in cichlids.

I've been aware that anadromous salmonids gain visual pigments annually upon sexual maturation. There are now company's producing UV reflective lures for bass. I was not aware that bass had such a capability, esp in light of the degradation of UV with dec water clarity. But, a very few anglers, myself included, have been aware of female LMB taking on a bluish "aura" (for lack of better) during the spawn. One angler/researcher has described female florida LMB as "lighting up" while in the throws of spawning. I've wondered if LMB also regenerate visual pigments annually, when they are in very shallow water to spawn. Visual cues during courtship are critical to spawning success for many fishes, bass too.

This might not help anglers any, if the bass, or trout, then lose those pigments.
BrookymanMay 6th, 2013, 3:28 pm
Banned
Posts: 797
PH has a large impact on how UV is absorbed, and viewed. I maybe wrong but if I remember back in 1985 the in fisherman team got to the UV spectrum through PH study. The value of UV is stabilized only by the measure of PH because only PH can collapse or overextend the UV wavelength. So this shows that there is some value in the use and understanding of UV. However the higher the PH level the greater the effect of how UV is perceived and utilized. I started wearing camouflage in 1982 for the same reasons. I don't care what color a fish sees a bush or a tree as. If I blend into the basic colorframes of what I am silhouetted against I am to some degree invisible to the eyes of a fish. I can tell you for sure that camo has a huge impact on my ability to gain close access to trout in small streams. You can not have an action without the reaction.

Albert Einstein " everything affects everything"

Mack.
Banned for threatening another user and then trying to circumvent a kinder "soft" ban with fake accounts
BrookymanMay 6th, 2013, 3:40 pm
Banned
Posts: 797
Hey Kurt

you mean to the older tread ???
Banned for threatening another user and then trying to circumvent a kinder "soft" ban with fake accounts
EntomanMay 6th, 2013, 4:01 pm
Northern CA & ID

Posts: 2604
Hi Mikey -

I did not see any reply I could identify as the author of Scientific Angling nor did anyone seem to address the question directly.

My apologies, Mikey. It is a very long thread and I should have identified the salient contributions and their authors. Reed (Overmywaders, who wrote the post with the graphs above) is the book's author. He made many excellent posts in the thread. Paul (PaulRoberts) addressed the question directly as well, with good counterpoints.

Further I am confused how the PH reference snuck in?

I was a bit confused by that as well. Mack (Brookyman) can speak for himself, but I believe he was referring to fluorescence/phosphorescence/UV reflection in a general acronym, not the chemical properties of water.

All those photos of materials under UV would be really useful if they were captured with normal vision equipment (no UV filter). That way we could see how they appear to the trouts normal VIS.

Ah! I struggled with this myself. The problem is how do you make something visible that is invisible without artifice? There's no way for us to know what reflected UV really "looks" like as we are blind to it. The problem with UV filters/infrared filters is that they distort the relationship with visible light as they would appear together in nature (if we could see it).

Though I find Reed's work fascinating, and well worth the dough, I'm still on the fence about all this. Even assuming he is correct about salmonid vision, the only way to make sure our flies look like the naturals would be to use sensitive equipment to measure the wavelengths of light reflected/emitted from the critters and then match our flies with materials that match not only in frequency blend (color match), but location (pattern). Practically speaking, that's an impossible task. Lets say a nymph is found to have some UV reflection of various frequencies from various locations on it's body (a debatable assumption as well in normal conditions, BTW). To simply add a particular UV frequency matching material to a fly willy nilly without good location or blending is like putting a red wingcase on a brown nymph to match a natural that has some red & blue highlights at various locations. To add UV material without any frequency match at all would be like putting a yellow wingcase on it. To what point?

"It's not that I find fishing so important, it's just that I find all other endeavors of Man equally unimportant... And not nearly as much fun!" Robert Traver, Anatomy of a Fisherman
OvermywaderMay 6th, 2013, 5:11 pm
Posts: 31First a reply to Mr. Roberts. I used those graphs because they were easier to understand than most of the trout specific retinal absorbance graphs available. However, if you piece together the graphs of rainbow trout retinal sensitivity found at http://jeb.biologists.org/content/204/14/2431.full.pdf you will see they are similar.

I wrote about riverine trout, I'll leave largemouth bass to you.

Entoman, you said "Even assuming he is correct about salmonid vision..."

It is not up to me to be correct about salmonid vision. The many scientists who have studied trout vision since 1993 - with Flamarique as the exception - asset that there exist UV specific corner cones in adult trout. Flamarique thinks they are blue-specific, but admits that in terms of trout vision, the secondary peak in the UV inexorably provides UV input.

The manner in which I hoped fishermen would take advantage of the ultraviolet vision of riverine trout was through applying some cool logic to the choice of flies and fly tying materials. For example, since many mayflies having their mating swarms after dusk, those mayflies would require UV markings by gender and species. Therefore, some UV reflectance in the wings and body - but particularly wings - would not be amiss in the artificials. I feel that the effective fly patterns shown in the book supported that hypothesis.

Regards,
Reed

Overmywaders
BrookymanMay 6th, 2013, 5:20 pm
Banned
Posts: 797
This is something I totally agree with gender/size/and color.
In a spinner fall I only use a precise female pattern with egg-sack attached
in the correct color. The amount I catch with this verse the smaller male is tenfold.

mayflies having their mating swarms after dusk, those mayflies would require UV markings by gender and species. Therefore, some UV reflectance in the wings and body - but particularly wings - would not be amiss in the artificials. I feel that the effective fly patterns shown in the book supported that hypothesis.
.


Mack.
Banned for threatening another user and then trying to circumvent a kinder "soft" ban with fake accounts
EntomanMay 6th, 2013, 5:26 pm
Northern CA & ID

Posts: 2604
Sorry about that, Reed. I did not mean to imply in any way that your reasoning regarding trout vision isn't backed by good science - just that that science (and the conclusions drawn from it) may or may not be eventually proved correct. Assuming it's correct, applying it to angling opens up even more puzzles to resolve. Fun stuff, to which you are greatly contributing.

Mack -

No, here. That's what I get for trying to interpret your use of PH. Sorry about that.:) Thanks for a further explanation of what you were trying to say. I wasn't aware PH had anything to do with UV penetration or perception.
"It's not that I find fishing so important, it's just that I find all other endeavors of Man equally unimportant... And not nearly as much fun!" Robert Traver, Anatomy of a Fisherman
EntomanMay 6th, 2013, 5:59 pm
Northern CA & ID

Posts: 2604
Mack,

I've found that trout (as with all wildlife) are disturbed primarily by movement, no matter what we are wearing. It's important to keep in mind that we aren't hunting ducks or turkeys whose sharp vision is working in the atmosphere. Fish in shallow water have a pretty small window looking out on the terrestrial world. The vast majority of the underside of the water is mirror and unless you are wearing glowing solid colors (like solid white or Red) it's a pretty safe bet that you aren't being noticed through it unless you're doing jumping jacks. However, If you are moving around in the window you're a dead duck no matter what you're wearing. Staying low below the window's horizon, keeping movement to a minimum, dull clothing, and no shiny/flashy objects are the keys. Excepting poor casting, fly line color is perhaps the most important detection factor on larger streams were keeping distance is easier. You don't want it contrasting with the background moving in and out of the window or have flashing movement penetrating the mirror.

Soft, slow wading (in calm streams) - keeping low with everything but the fly and tippet out of the window - minimized movement and flash outside of the window in the mirror - competent casting and fly placement - delicate pick-up as far away from the "zone" as practical; these are the key components to trout angling stealth. Failing to observe these practices will usually prove fatal to one's chances, whether you paint your face and wear camo or not...
"It's not that I find fishing so important, it's just that I find all other endeavors of Man equally unimportant... And not nearly as much fun!" Robert Traver, Anatomy of a Fisherman
MIKE54May 28th, 2013, 9:55 pm
Posts: 2Scatter light...that's it. I started mixing SLF Prism I fibers in with my rabbit dubs awhile back...more fish. And more recently I started mixing in Ice Dub fibers (some UV, some not), more fish. It's the flash, not the light spectrum. Remember, all the manufacturers are trying to sell something to YOU. Brown trout don't buy books. Brown trout buy something that looks like supper...and a little pinch of flashy synthetic mixed in with your go-to dub may cause that bruiser to come up to the nymph...Scatter light...
BrookymanMay 16th, 2014, 3:21 pm
Banned
Posts: 797
What a great subject. I let this one go for awhile. It is a book that I would like to read only because I am so in tune with size, shape, and color and new concepts. First do I believe that UV is relevant ??? sorta. To me the question is not whether its relevant, but rather is it valuable.


Too me I think that the time frame in which trout have to respond to a fly takes precedence. DR Rick Hafele explained in the 3M video ANATOMY OF A TROUT STREAM. That in a riffle trout typically have less than 1/10th of a second to respond to the fly in whether to take or reject the fly. As the water slows this time frame would obviously lengthen. So considering that the largest percentage of insects that trout feed on are "riffle-borne" I think the UV value is moderate and relevant to the situation at hand. However when we look at insects that hatch from slower waters I think that it could only help. In the case of "streamers and nymphs" I feel it could very likely help. But then again from my experience I believe that the matching of a color has the greatest overall impact.

Regardless what the fish sees if you match the color dead on and we add the time frame response to the equation I am not sure UV is really needed. Of course after I read Mr Curry's book I may adopt some of this theory.


I am so far into my dubbing material that I just don't see me adding something new. I have way over 300 pre-manufactured colors and 80 species blends for all four stages = 320 mixtures. So too add something to that is not likely unless it is species derived which I make myself. But for someone not so far in why not add this stuff it can only help especially is you fish still waters, then it would likely be a big help IMO.




Mack.
Banned for threatening another user and then trying to circumvent a kinder "soft" ban with fake accounts
Page:12

Quick Reply

You have to be logged in to post on the forum. It's this easy:
Username:          Email:

Password:    Confirm Password:

I am at least 13 years old and agree to the rules.

Related Discussions

TitleRepliesLast Reply
Re: Another sulphur for comment
In Female Ephemerella invaria Mayfly Dun by Martinlf
1Aug 21, 2007
by Gene
Re: Unidentified Mayfly
In the Identify This! Board by And
7Jun 19, 2008
by And
Re: Mack mayfly found dead !!!! perfect emerger color !!!!
(5 more)

In the Identify This! Board by Brookyman
1May 7, 2013
by Brookyman
BQ Nymph
In Neoleptophlebia Mayfly Nymph by Martinlf
0
Re: underwater photos
In the Mayfly Species Ephemerella subvaria by Martinlf
4Apr 21, 2007
by PeterO
Re: Thoughts on this Heptageniid's ID?
In Male Epeorus vitreus Mayfly Dun by Troutnut
1Oct 28, 2008
by GONZO
Re: Bug Bellies II
In the Photography Board by Gripngrin
13Jul 23, 2007
by IEatimago
Re: Baetid nymph color
In Male Baetidae Mayfly Nymph by Martinlf
1Dec 26, 2006
by GONZO
Re: Pattern Suggestions
In General Discussion by Kschaefer3
5Mar 1, 2016
by Jmd123
Re: Ephemerellidae with a mate :-)
(4 more)

In the Identify This! Board by Brookyman
4May 14, 2014
by Brookyman
Most Recent Posts
Re: Floating line, WF or DT
In Gear Talk by Red_green_h (Wbranch replied)
Re: Euro Nymph Rod
In Gear Talk by Wbranch (Martinlf replied)
Re: Long-time reader, never-time poster? Start here!
In General Discussion by Troutnut (Wbranch replied)
Re: Dubbing wax questions
In Fly Tying by Brian314 (Wbranch replied)
Re: Firehole Dry Fly hooks
In Fly Tying by Iasgair (TNEAL replied)
Invitation to the 33rd Slovenian Open Fly Tying Championship 2020
In General Discussion by Lucky_luke
Re: Fishing Rod Suggestions
In Gear Talk by Princemoga (Wbranch replied)
Re: Little Manistee
In Fishing Reports by Summer_doug
Re: Iowa Driftless
In General Discussion by KevinB (Red_green_h replied)
Re: Need an excuse to buy new rods
In Gear Talk by Barbaube (Red_green_h replied)