Some say bass see UV light well and that it penetrates deeper in the water. I have no earthly clue if its true or not as I rarely see any lures with a UV coating. I thought about trying some UV dip but im wary its a marketing ploy. Is there any science to this?

Mostly gimmick - current research suggests that it's possible that some sunfish species may possess UV photoreceptors as juveniles to help feed on zooplankton, but they lose this ability (lack UV photoreceptors) as adults. Bass are thought to be similar, but nothing I've seen in the literature suggests adult bass can see in the UV light spectrum.

It's total hooy for bass.  There might be something to it for salmonids, though there is research steelhead lose it during smoltification.

What does "hooy" mean...is that a scientific environmental term I've fell asleep on during class? ?

6 minutes ago, Jigfishn10 said:

What does "hooy" mean

I guess "Horse Hockey" is out of the question Colonel Potter.

2 hours ago, Team9nine said:

Mostly gimmick - current research suggests that it's possible that some sunfish species may possess UV photoreceptors as juveniles to help feed on zooplankton, but they lose this ability (lack UV photoreceptors) as adults. Bass are thought to be similar, but nothing I've seen in the literature suggests adult bass can see in the UV light spectrum.

 

That's my understanding too.

 

It's not out of the realm of possibility, but it's always worth asking why a species would have a particular ability.  It's not clear what benefit UV vision would be to a shallow-water species like bass, except when very young. This kind of ability makes more sense for deep-water species, to support vision at depths beyond the point where parts of the visible range of light spectrum fail to penetrate.

8 minutes ago, MIbassyaker said:

 

That's my understanding too.

 

It's not out of the realm of possibility, but it's always worth asking why a species would have a particular ability.  It's not clear what benefit UV vision would be to a shallow-water species like bass, except when very young. This kind of ability makes more sense for deep-water species, to support vision at depths beyond the point where parts of the visible range of light spectrum fail to penetrate.

That actually has me thinking about what those juvenile fish are eating.  I wonder/bet if certain critters can be seen better with UV vision.

The dip was marketed as making the bait glow to the bass. If that was true everyone would be doing it i would think. So that's what initially made me skeptical. If its so amazing and works so well, why doesn't every lure manufacturer make theirs with a UV coating? 

 

I knew people here would have the science behind it. Bass Resource ruins another sale for gimmicky hooy!!

We're all here to help. 

17 minutes ago, J Francho said:

That actually has me thinking about what those juvenile fish are eating.  I wonder/bet if certain critters can be seen better with UV vision.

 

Indeed, that seems to be the case for organisms that can use transparency as camouflage (which tend to be only the very small, like zooplankton)

 

From the abstract of this study:

 

"The use of transparency as camouflage in the epipelagic realm is complicated by the presence of ultraviolet radiation, because the presence of UV-protective pigments decreases UV transparency and may reveal transparent zooplankton to predators and prey with UV vision."

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s002270000499

   The only experience I've had with UV was to use spinners that were supposed to be more visible in the presence of UV light, like certain Panther Martin and Mepps Comet-UV spinners. I never saw any difference in 2 full years of use, so I think "hooey" is an accurate description.          jj

5 hours ago, MIbassyaker said:

 

Indeed, that seems to be the case for organisms that can use transparency as camouflage (which tend to be only the very small, like zooplankton)

 

From the abstract of this study:

 

"The use of transparency as camouflage in the epipelagic realm is complicated by the presence of ultraviolet radiation, because the presence of UV-protective pigments decreases UV transparency and may reveal transparent zooplankton to predators and prey with UV vision."

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s002270000499

But what predators have UV vision at adult age?

25 minutes ago, Luke Barnes said:

But what predators have UV vision at adult age?

 

Some salmon, many birds including owls and hawks, plus cats, dogs and reindeer are all believed to see UV. Some of the raptors are pretty cool because they are believed to find their prey not by seeing the mouse, but by following their urine trail to the critter’s location because it is visible to them in part of the UV spectrum.

Just posted this same video on another thread, but it's even more relevant here

 

28 minutes ago, JohnFromLisbon said:

 

About that UV thing... (starts at about 5:49 if the timestamp doesn't work)

 

I didn't know it either, and I had ordered a two pack of "UV enhanced Fish Sticks". To be fair, the only reason I got the UV ones was because TW had it as a pack and it was cheaper than the regular ones. Edwin Evers had two videos with Mark Sexton and he explained a ton about the biology and anatomy of bass.
 

 

I’ve never seen a bass wear sunscreen or sunglasses, but who knows.

29 minutes ago, JohnFromLisbon said:

Just posted this same video on another thread, but it's even more relevant here

 

Good video.

1 hour ago, JohnFromLisbon said:

Just posted this same video on another thread, but it's even more relevant here

 

I saw that. That's why I made this thread, to find out the science behind it. Apparently it got moved to tackle and lures but I'm not talking about lures. Just if they truly see in UV or not. 

35 minutes ago, Luke Barnes said:

I saw that. That's why I made this thread, to find out the science behind it. Apparently it got moved to tackle and lures but I'm not talking about lures. Just if they truly see in UV or not. 

 

If Mark Sexton says they can't, I'm pretty sure they don't. The man has a MS in Fisheries Biology, as well as all the research work he does over at Berkley.

 

If you're looking for more detailed info I found this paper

 

It also validates what Mark said in an earlier video about bass not being able to discern the color blue. 

 

The reflectance of the chartreuse yellow stimulus was greater than 100% because it reflected more light than the diffuse standard we used for our calibrations. This happened due to the fluorescent properties of chartreuse yellow, where UV photons are absorbed and then emitted at a longer wavelength (Johnsen and Mobley 2012; Mitchem and Fuller, unpublished data). However, our white training target also had a reflectance slightly greater than 100%. Regardless, our model indicated that these 2 visual stimuli should appear similar to the bass.

(...)

Green sunfish twin cones were slightly red-shifted compared with largemouth bass (green sunfish twin cone: 621 nm; largemouth bass twin cone: 614.48). In addition, Dearry and Barlow also did not find evidence for blue or UV sensitive cones in adult fish.

 

Edit: I also found a link to the Dearry and Barlow paper that the first one referred to about green sunfish

Edited February 20, 20215 yr by JohnFromLisbon
Broken link on first paper + more info

 

Pi,t=∫λ=700λ=350Ai(λ)RT(λ)Eh(λ)Pi,t=∫λ=350λ=700AiλRTλEhλ

 

That's what I was thinking...

56 minutes ago, JohnFromLisbon said:

 

If Mark Sexton says they can't, I'm pretty sure they don't. The man has a MS in Fisheries Biology, as well as all the research work he does over at Berkley.

 

If you're looking for more detailed info I found this paper

 

It also validates what Mark said in an earlier video about bass not being able to discern the color blue. 

 

The reflectance of the chartreuse yellow stimulus was greater than 100% because it reflected more light than the diffuse standard we used for our calibrations. This happened due to the fluorescent properties of chartreuse yellow, where UV photons are absorbed and then emitted at a longer wavelength (Johnsen and Mobley 2012; Mitchem and Fuller, unpublished data). However, our white training target also had a reflectance slightly greater than 100%. Regardless, our model indicated that these 2 visual stimuli should appear similar to the bass.

(...)

Green sunfish twin cones were slightly red-shifted compared with largemouth bass (green sunfish twin cone: 621 nm; largemouth bass twin cone: 614.48). In addition, Dearry and Barlow also did not find evidence for blue or UV sensitive cones in adult fish.

 

Edit: I also found a link to the Dearry and Barlow paper that the first one referred to about green sunfish

Awesome info!! That's a treasure trove of knowledge! 

32 minutes ago, roadwarrior said:

 

Pi,t=∫λ=700λ=350Ai(λ)RT(λ)Eh(λ)Pi,t=∫λ=350λ=700AiλRTλEhλ

 

That's what I was thinking...

 

For full credit, you have to show your work...