Behavioral Differences Between Bass Species

[coryn h. fishowl]

Now, most people know certain specific behavioral differences such as smallmouth bass more often going for crawfish and living in clearer deeper, cooler water and being more streamlined while largemouth have a more varied diet etc.  So what are some species specific behavioral differences you've noticed, e.g. fastest bass (I would say smallmouth), which one more often chases fish (SM)/most commonly ambushes (LM), aggressiveness (LM are overall more aggressive, SM fight more aggressively), strength, diet etc?  What are some interesting things you've noted in specific differences in groups of bass; perhaps bass in one region prefer crawfish more, or you've one species has a faster cruising speed than another or strikes differently than another?

I personally have just learned that NE bass are less likely to strike (brightly colored) salamander baits because the real thing, inn that area, is usually poisonous.

Go wild

[WRB]

There are several different species of fresh water black bass, the most common being Spotted bass, Smallmouth bass and Largemouth bass, Both Spotted and Largemouth have 2 different strains that affect size and prey preferences.

Spotted and Smallmouth bass are river bass that live in both rivers and lakes, both behave as if they live in moving water and tend to roam a lot looking for prey. Largemouth are lake bass, tend to stay in one area, and move during migrational periods and don't roam by nature.

Largemouth bass eat a wider variety of prey because they can with a larger mouth. All bass like to eat crawdads and baitfish, they are a predators that adapt to the ecosystem they live in.

Both Spots and Smallies spawn in colder water than Largemouth and tend to like gravel bottoms, where Largemouth are not as particular, preferring more sheltered areas.

Could go on for several pages, this should get you started.

Tom

[coryn h. fishowl]

There are several different species of fresh water black bass, the most common being Spotted bass, a small mouth bass and largemouth bass, Both Spotted and Largemouth have 2 different strains that affect size and prey preferences.

Spotted and Smallmouth bass are river bass that live in both rivers and lakes, both behave as if they live in moving water andctendcto roam a lot looking for prey. Largemouth are lake bass, tend to stay in one area, and move during migration all periods, they don't roam by nature.

Largemouth bass eat a wider variety of prey because they can with a larger mouth. All bass like to eat crawdads and baitfish, they are a predators that adapt to the ecosystem they live in.

Both Spots and Smallies spawn in colder water than Largemouth and tend to like gravel bottoms, where Largemouth are not as particular, preferring more sheltered areas.

Could go on for several pages, this should get you started.

Tom

I'm quite familiar with this myself. I was asking rather, if anyone has noticed anyone specific differences in groups of bass; perhaps bass in one region prefer crawfish more, or that they've noticed one species has a faster cruising speed than another or how NE bass are less likely to strike (brightly colored) salamander baits because the real thing, inn that area, is usually poisonous.

[Bluebasser86]

Bass will behave differently between lakes also, depending on cover and prey species. One lake I fish a lot the largemouth are the ones that cruise in schools over open water chasing baitfish, while the smallmouth stay on the banks chasing bluegill and craws. Some places they act very similar. I've had trips at Table Rock where I've caught all 3 off the same spot on the same bait.

Largemouth seem to be the only one I've ever caught in any real numbers in portions of lakes that stay very muddy. Smallmouth are probably the fastest and I'd argue the most aggressive, when they are actively feeding. 

[coryn h. fishowl]

A friend of mine recently noticed that at a lake he fished, during summer, after a cold front would sweep through, and the shallows would get foggy, the LM left and SM came in.  Myself wanting to be a wildlife biologist/animal behaviorist, this was a neat nut to crack.  I realized than the temp/ barometric pressure would have been uncomfortable for bass and bluegill who would leave the shallows, one following the other.  With competition gone SM would then go to the most crawfish/minnow rich portion of the lake...the shallows that the big mouths were leaving.  The largemouth fed mostly on the numerous meal sized bluegill, channel cats, frogs and even garter snakes in that area, while mostly ignoring the crawfish/minnows that SM seemed to seek.  (I assume because they found those to be a less rewarding food source and because the crawfish were markedly more active during foggy times, probably because the overall numbers of predators had suddenly dropped.) Afterwards, when temps went up and the fog cleared, the largemouth chased away smallies who returned to deeper areas with different forage.

[WRB]

All amphibians have poisionous skin secretions, frogs, salamanders, newts and bass eat them without any problems. The critters that don't learn from mistakes, don't survive.

Prey preference is usually a matter if availability, bass prefer high protein prey that is nearby, easy to catch and abundant. Genetically some bass species are better suited to catch and eat different types of prey. For example Florida strain LMB prefer baitfish in the shape of golden shiners; long slender baitfish over shorter wider baitfish. When FLMB were transplanted into California lakes, no golden shiners were available and planted rainbow trout filled that niche. The northern LMB in the same lakes tend to ignor planted rainbow trout, preferring to eat smaller Threadfin shad, bluegill, crappie, green sunfish. Both FLMB and NLMB targeted crawdads in the same lakes they shared.

Then consider the method the different bass species go about hunting and eating prey. Smallmouth and Spotted bass are more selective hunters than LMB and faster stronger swimmers covering more water than LMB. Spotted and Smallmouth bass tend to dash into bait schools, LMB tend to heard them into feeding zones before attacking. LMB engulf prey in one gulp, both Spotted And Smallmouth tend to bite their prey first.

Tom

[coryn h. fishowl]

All amphibians have poisionous skin secretions, frogs, salamanders, newts and bass eat them without any problems. The critters that don't learn from mistakes, don't survive.

Actually, given that poison is very metabolically expensive to make, very few utilize them.  Far more however, mimic poisonous ones, but this is a double edged sword. As poisonous animals are usually colorful, the mimics must be also, and any predator that has not tangled with a toxic creature (which is likely, given that due to the metabolic price, toxic amphibians have generally few offspring) would eat them.  Most amphibians are fine with using camouflage, and given that much of their metabolic efforts are not focused on making toxins, will grow faster/larger e.g. an non toxic eatern hellbender is non toxic and larger, the poisonous spotted salamander are much smaller.  The NE has a particularly high # of poisonous salamanders such as Spotted salamanders, so if usind lizard baits in that regions, I would stick with pumpkinseed colored baits.

[DocBar]

Wouldn't a better title be "Behavioral Differences in Species Between Regions"?  I grew up fishing in SE Texas, where there weren't a lot of SM, but any bass would nail a crawfish anything. I'm now in El Centro, Ca. and these bass don;t know what a crawfish is. 6 months fishing, not a single bite on a craw anything. Lot's of fish on a Rapala CD 7 or 9 in brown trout (they stock brown trout in this pond every spring) that a fish from SE Texas would look at funny. There just aren't any brown trout there. It looks funny/odd to them.

 

Paying attention to local forage is much more productive than behavior of a certain species of bass. They will all eat basically the same thing. I've never seen one spit out a shad to go eat a crawfish or vice versa. I have seen them ignore something that doesn't appear to be their natural prey for the location. 

[hoosierbass07]

Today I bought some In-Fisherman DVDs on sale at Gander Mountain. I watched a couple tonight and one short segment was about the differences of LMB in different regions. One thing I remember them saying is that Illinois LMB were transplanted to Minnesota lakes and not one survived Minnesota's cold winter weather. So as one would assume, northern bass keep eating at a cold temperature that would shut down southern bass.

[SENKOSAM]

 

NE bass are less likely to strike (brightly colored) salamander baits because the real thing, inn that area, is usually poisonous.

 

Hard to believe bass have the intelligence to know the difference between poisonous and non-poisinous.  I've caught LM on bright colored lizards and spotted Mr Twister salamanders for years.

[KyakR]

Found this fascinating article about how environmental pressure from human beings is changing the behavior of bass:

    "Although a great deal of effort has been expended to try to understand the consequences of fishing-induced selection by commercial fisheries, relatively little effort has been put into trying to understand the selective effects of recreational angling. We conducted a long-term selection experiment to assess the heritability of vulnerability to angling in largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides. Three successive generations of artificially selected largemouth bass were produced from a single experimental study population. Within each generation, individual adult largemouth bass were identified as having either high or low vulnerability to angling through a series of controlled catch-and-release angling trials. Individuals of each vulnerability group (high and low) were then selected from that population for breeding to produce the next generation. The response to selection for vulnerability to angling increased with each generation; that is, the magnitude of the difference between the high- and low-vulnerability groups of fish increased with each successive generation. Realized heritability was calculated as 0.146 (r 2 = 0.995), indicating that the vulnerability of largemouth bass to angling is indeed a heritable trait. Our results indicate that recreational angling has the potential to alter the gene pool of wild fish populations, which may indirectly affect population characteristics such as survival, growth rate, and reproductive output as well as directly affecting angling success rates." Wow!

[slonezp]

Found this fascinating article about how environmental pressure from human beings is changing the behavior of bass:

    "Although a great deal of effort has been expended to try to understand the consequences of fishing-induced selection by commercial fisheries, relatively little effort has been put into trying to understand the selective effects of recreational angling. We conducted a long-term selection experiment to assess the heritability of vulnerability to angling in largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides. Three successive generations of artificially selected largemouth bass were produced from a single experimental study population. Within each generation, individual adult largemouth bass were identified as having either high or low vulnerability to angling through a series of controlled catch-and-release angling trials. Individuals of each vulnerability group (high and low) were then selected from that population for breeding to produce the next generation. The response to selection for vulnerability to angling increased with each generation; that is, the magnitude of the difference between the high- and low-vulnerability groups of fish increased with each successive generation. Realized heritability was calculated as 0.146 (r 2 = 0.995), indicating that the vulnerability of largemouth bass to angling is indeed a heritable trait. Our results indicate that recreational angling has the potential to alter the gene pool of wild fish populations, which may indirectly affect population characteristics such as survival, growth rate, and reproductive output as well as directly affecting angling success rates." Wow!

Who is "we" and "our"? Are they a credible source?

[KyakR]

Actually, there is a bit of academic snippiness about this issue.......here's the link to the abstract ( American Fisheries Transaction Soc.)

[coryn h. fishowl]

Hard to believe bass have the intelligence to know the difference between poisonous and non-poisinous.  I've caught LM on bright colored lizards and spotted Mr Twister salamanders for years.

However true that may be, I'd rather go with pumpkinseed though

[SENKOSAM]

 

However true that may be, I'd rather go with pumpkinseed though

You and me both.

[coryn h. fishowl]

Found this fascinating article about how environmental pressure from human beings is changing the behavior of bass:

    "Although a great deal of effort has been expended to try to understand the consequences of fishing-induced selection by commercial fisheries, relatively little effort has been put into trying to understand the selective effects of recreational angling. We conducted a long-term selection experiment to assess the heritability of vulnerability to angling in largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides. Three successive generations of artificially selected largemouth bass were produced from a single experimental study population. Within each generation, individual adult largemouth bass were identified as having either high or low vulnerability to angling through a series of controlled catch-and-release angling trials. Individuals of each vulnerability group (high and low) were then selected from that population for breeding to produce the next generation. The response to selection for vulnerability to angling increased with each generation; that is, the magnitude of the difference between the high- and low-vulnerability groups of fish increased with each successive generation. Realized heritability was calculated as 0.146 (r 2 = 0.995), indicating that the vulnerability of largemouth bass to angling is indeed a heritable trait. Our results indicate that recreational angling has the potential to alter the gene pool of wild fish populations, which may indirectly affect population characteristics such as survival, growth rate, and reproductive output as well as directly affecting angling success rates." Wow!

Fascinating but not entirely unprecedented as it has been proven that does have a (however limited) effect on the health of a fish.  Therefore, a fish that has never been caught would likely be slightly more fit than its easily caught counterpart.  This is without even mentioning that some with will inevitably die from the stress of being caught. Natural Selection will whittle down any genetic predispositions toward habits that endanger the health/ability to sire more offspring.  Fascinating Watson!!

[Brian Needham]

Found this fascinating article about how environmental pressure from human beings is changing the behavior of bass:

    "Although a great deal of effort has been expended to try to understand the consequences of fishing-induced selection by commercial fisheries, relatively little effort has been put into trying to understand the selective effects of recreational angling. We conducted a long-term selection experiment to assess the heritability of vulnerability to angling in largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides. Three successive generations of artificially selected largemouth bass were produced from a single experimental study population. Within each generation, individual adult largemouth bass were identified as having either high or low vulnerability to angling through a series of controlled catch-and-release angling trials. Individuals of each vulnerability group (high and low) were then selected from that population for breeding to produce the next generation. The response to selection for vulnerability to angling increased with each generation; that is, the magnitude of the difference between the high- and low-vulnerability groups of fish increased with each successive generation. Realized heritability was calculated as 0.146 (r 2 = 0.995), indicating that the vulnerability of largemouth bass to angling is indeed a heritable trait. Our results indicate that recreational angling has the potential to alter the gene pool of wild fish populations, which may indirectly affect population characteristics such as survival, growth rate, and reproductive output as well as directly affecting angling success rates." Wow!

 

 

allow me to simplify..............the stupid ones got caught. Then "we" made them inbreed to make "stupider" fish that got caught more. LOL

[WRB]

It's the opposite. The most aggressive bass get caught, the less aggressive and more cautious bass servive. In a few generations we end up a population of bass that are harder to fool with artifical lures.

FLMB are less aggressive than NLMB, in the lakes that have or had where I have bass fished over 50 year period. In the early years the FLMB were thought to be uncatchable on artifical lures, only live bait worked.

In the San Diego lakes the bass anglers in the know, like Bill Murphy, were live bait specialist. Being a diehard lure angler I spent a lot of time trying to catch FLMB on lures. I learned a lot bout fishing live bait and the SD guys learned how to use big soft plastic worms and jigs. At the end of the day we shared and learned together that FLMB were different from the bass we knew, the agressive eaier to catch NLMB.

The vast majority if the country has NLMB because FLMB can!t survive water less than 45 degrees. Texas/Oklahoma has tied to genetically alter the FLMB to have a lower water temp tolerance, don't believe it was a success.

If you want to catch FLMB that grow over 15 lbs., your choice is warmer climates. Be aware these bass are not easy to catch on lures.

Tom

[Brian Needham]

Tom, my comment was more tongue in cheek, joking more than anything.

[WRB]

Tom, my comment was more tongue in cheek, joking more than anything.

No problem, it's getting harder to find those retarded bass!

Tom

[SENKOSAM]

 

The most aggressive bass get caught, the less aggressive and more cautious bass survive. In a few generations we end up a population of bass that are harder to fool with artificial lures.

 

A far less accepted view would be that bass never believe an artificial is a real representation of anything it eats or that it was exposed to for the first time. Remember the Glen Lau video of the bass taking down the duckling by its leg? Remember an event where a large California bass was found to have diver's weights in its stomach?

 

Fish are stupid and on a scale of intelligence as compared to higher forms, ranks right down there with insects and as with insects have reflexes and instincts to help them survive. But unlike mammals with reflexes and instincts, a bass does not have the mental capacity to think beyond them, mental being the key word. If it did, it would have characteristics that demonstrate some sort of intelligence instead of simple neurological activity.

 

To put this into a fish's simple response-to-artificials perspective, if one considers the possibility that a bass is not capable of knowing what an artificial represents but instead simply reacts because the lure pushes it's aggression buttons, than an angler may chose what lure characteristics work best at what time of day or year and how the lure is presented. The best anglers figured this out the first time they switched from one lure type and action to another and caught bass.

 

Relating this to the idea that a bass always thinks a lure is one thing but then rejects it because it's not part of its diet-of-the-moment, suggests that it is capable of thoughtful choice, like that of a child refusing to eat peas but not candy. But, IMO, a bass will always opt to eat a real life form (strange or familiar) because its instincts and body tell it to by whatever physiological means it has that far surpass anything a human has minus the power of a complex brain.

 

Physiologically, the function of the brain is to exert centralized control over the other organs of the body. The brain acts on the rest of the body both by generating patterns of muscle activity and by driving the secretion of chemicals called hormones. This centralized control allows rapid and coordinated responses to changes in the environment. Some basic types of responsiveness such as reflexes can be mediated by the spinal cord or peripheral ganglia, but sophisticated purposeful control of behavior based on complex sensory input requires the information-integrating capabilities of a centralized brain.From a philosophical point of view, what makes the brain special in comparison to other organs is that it forms the physical structure associated with a mind.

 

Intelligence requires the possession of a mind. Bass don't have minds but rather reflexes that get them into trouble when they slowly or instantly react to an artifical lure. We think of all reflexive action as instantaneous and confuse it with voluntary action - defined as

an anticipated, but not necessarily conscious, goal-orientated movement. This psychological concept is part of cognitive psychology that is associated with consciousness and will.

 

 I'm convinced from years of catching bass on artificials that reflexive and involuntary actions intersect, but only when it comes to artificial lures, but that reflexive and voluntary actions happen when a bass's senses confirms a thing is alive and edible.

In the same sense (no pun), a bass voluntarily rejects something based on a set of senses that easily determine real life, but at the same time attack an object that forces it to react but not necessarily feed on based on it being irritated by its presence.

 

An obvious example would be to place a real crawfish near a bass and at the same time, a jig with craw-type trailer. Which would the bass go for? I don't care if KVD was working the jig - the craw would be consumed and the jig ignored. On the other hand, picture prey being in abundance near a bass, but all of a sudden a jig hits bottom, begins to moves on or off the bottom and bang! a bass attacks! Did it hit because for one moment it believed the lure a real crawfish? Did nearby bass learn the lesson from seeing a bass being caught on it that jigs should always be avoided? Doubtful.

 

Do bass in a feeding frenzy attack lures that appear similar to what they are feeding on - usually other fish regardless of species?  I've been fortunate to catch bass schooled within casting distance on different lure types and still caught bass after bass.  A higher aggression level made the fish strike, yet its simple brain didn't warn it to avoid lures that took fish out of the school or that a worm is not a fish.

 

The above makes lure choice a no-brainer, pun intended.

[coryn h. fishowl]

A far less accepted view would be that bass never believe an artificial is a real representation of anything it eats or that it was exposed to for the first time. Remember the Glen Lau video of the bass taking down the duckling by its leg? Remember an event where a large California bass was found to have diver's weights in its stomach?

 

Fish are stupid and on a scale of intelligence as compared to higher forms, ranks right down there with insects and as with insects have reflexes and instincts to help them survive. But unlike mammals with reflexes and instincts, a bass does not have the mental capacity to think beyond them, mental being the key word. If it did, it would have characteristics that demonstrate some sort of intelligence instead of simple neurological activity.

 

To put this into a fish's simple response-to-artificials perspective, if one considers the possibility that a bass is not capable of knowing what an artificial represents but instead simply reacts because the lure pushes it's aggression buttons, than an angler may chose what lure characteristics work best at what time of day or year and how the lure is presented. The best anglers figured this out the first time they switched from one lure type and action to another and caught bass.

 

Relating this to the idea that a bass always thinks a lure is one thing but then rejects it because it's not part of its diet-of-the-moment, suggests that it is capable of thoughtful choice, like that of a child refusing to eat peas but not candy. But, IMO, a bass will always opt to eat a real life form (strange or familiar) because its instincts and body tell it to by whatever physiological means it has that far surpass anything a human has minus the power of a complex brain.

 

Intelligence requires the possession of a mind. Bass don't have minds but rather reflexes that get them into trouble when they slowly or instantly react to an artifical lure. We think of all reflexive action as instantaneous and confuse it with voluntary action - defined as

 I'm convinced from years of catching bass on artificials that reflexive and involuntary actions intersect, but only when it comes to artificial lures, but that reflexive and voluntary actions happen when a bass's senses confirms a thing is alive and edible.

In the same sense (no pun), a bass voluntarily rejects something based on a set of senses that easily determine real life, but at the same time attack an object that forces it to react but not necessarily feed on based on it being irritated by its presence.

 

An obvious example would be to place a real crawfish near a bass and at the same time, a jig with craw-type trailer. Which would the bass go for? I don't care if KVD was working the jig - the craw would be consumed and the jig ignored. On the other hand, picture prey being in abundance near a bass, but all of a sudden a jig hits bottom, begins to moves on or off the bottom and bang! a bass attacks! Did it hit because for one moment it believed the lure a real crawfish? Did nearby bass learn the lesson from seeing a bass being caught on it that jigs should always be avoided? Doubtful.

 

Do bass in a feeding frenzy attack lures that appear similar to what they are feeding on - usually other fish regardless of species?  I've been fortunate to catch bass schooled within casting distance on different lure types and still caught bass after bass.  A higher aggression level made the fish strike, yet its simple brain didn't warn it to avoid lures that took fish out of the school or that a worm is not a fish.

 

The above makes lure choice a no-brainer, pun intended.

Make no mistake, I have had extensive experience with fish, (aquariums) and somethings need not represent a natural food item for it to be found attractive.  Think, for a moment, the first time a LMB encounters something that will become a food source, for example, a bluegill. At that point the bass does not know that bluegills are food...and yet it strike.  It simply has to look like a potential meal. For example, a Senko looks like nothing in a bass' diet, and yet... The downside is that something like a spinnerbait, that mimics nothing in a bass' diet that it can be burnt out; as opposed to something like a fluke, which, mimicking a wounded baitfish, won't get burnt out as easily because it mimics something a bass regularly eats.

[SENKOSAM]

 

the first time a LMB encounters something that will become a food source, for example, a bluegill. At that point the bass does not know that bluegills are food...and yet it strike.  It simply has to look like a potential meal.

 

I would go one step further - it also has to feel, move, taste of and smell  alive - or in other words, sense provoking.  I believe a bass is wired to know the difference between realistic looking lures and a live protein source it's supposed to simulate, never confusing the two in the wild. Plus I agree with your statement,

 

somethings need not represent a natural food item for it to be found attractive.

  I'll go one step further: Some lures have unique characteristics that simulate the action of a prey animal regardless of overall appearance (ie spinnerbait in your example); other lure actions primarily just make them take notice and challenge them by being a bit too flashy in appearance or motions within their zones of aggression.

 

The fluke and Mann's Shadow are perfect examples of action simulations close to those of minnows. The waddle of swimbaits simulate that of a cat fish/ mad tom. The quiver/flash of a 3" Rapala (in the right hands) simulates that of a minnow in it's last gasps near the surface, while the suspending X-Rap simulates something different - a fish pausing mid-depth. Granted, these simulations of actions and motion may not be convincing to a bass that the lure is a real animal, but simulated actions can't hurt when bass are already primed for action, needing that extra push. Finesse lures and their presentations are mostly successful due to live bait action-simulations and anglers buy many of the most expensive plugs because they excel at providing that something that triggers a response when worked slowly.

 

Sudden reflex responses don't require finesse and highly unrealistic looking and moving lures fit into a lure category that challenges a bass, raising its aggression level in the shortest period of time. Fast moving, wide-wobble crankbaits and burned, large willow leaf spinnerbaits don't give a fish time to raise its aggression level slowly and multiple strikes sometimes happen in the same area (but only when the time is right  to use those lures).

 

Nice talking to you coryn along the lines of conjecture based on experience . Fish aren't logical, but anglers should be, though many are very successful believing conventional reasons fish strike lures. I haven't taught my grandkids those reasons and they do very well catching fish near their casts on lures that may or may not simulate. After seeing a worm squirm on the hook, they will never use live bait again!

[KyakR]

Tom made a comment on another thread about the transition of LMB from eating phytoplankton when fry to eating other fish (he called it piscivory)......how fish that make that transition earlier than the others are more successful survivors. It blows me away how many factors interact to produce a certain behavior in any animal! It's a beautiful thing! The article I quoted perked my ears up because it made a connection between actual genes and one behavior without elaborating on what genes and how they work to influence behavior. The idea that LMB's genes actually change in response to us was new to me. But  SENKOSAM clarified this when he pointed out that because bass don't exactly have much between the ears (?), reflexive and instinctual behavior are in the driver's seat, and these are powerfully mediated by genes. I'm wonky by nature, and love to read.....but though I have years on the water I never had a teacher to point out the big picture and help me connect the dots. That makes all the difference, no matter that I can read the science. So here's another one, he he    

"Physiological and Biochemical Zoology © 2007 The University of Chicago Press

Abstract:

Few studies have examined the physiological and behavioral consequences of fisheries‐induced selection. We evaluated how four generations of artificial truncation selection for vulnerability to recreational angling (i.e., stocks selected for high and low vulnerability [HVF and LVF, respectively]) affected cardiovascular physiology and parental care behavior in the teleost fish largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides. Where possible, we compared artificially selected fish to control fish (CF) collected from the wild. Although, compared to control fish, resting cardiac activity was ∼18% lower for LVF and ∼20% higher for HVF, maximal values did not vary among treatments. As a result, the HVF had less cardiac scope than either LVF or CF. Recovery rates after exercise were similar for HVF and CF but slower for LVF. When engaged in parental care activities, nesting male HVF were captured more easily than male LVF. During parental care, HVF also had higher turning rates and pectoral and caudal fin beat rates, increased vigilance against predators, and higher in situ swimming speeds. Energetics simulations indicated that to achieve the same level of growth, the disparity in metabolic rates would require HVF to consume approximately 40% more food than LVF. Selection for angling vulnerability resulted in clear differences in physiological and energetic attributes. Not only is vulnerability to angling a heritable trait, but high vulnerability covaries with factors including higher metabolic rates, reduced metabolic scope, and increased parental care activity. Despite these energetically costly differences, HVF and LVF of the same age were of similar size, suggesting that heightened food consumption in HVF compensated for added costs in experimental ponds. Ultimately, angling vulnerability appears to be a complex interaction of numerous factors leading to selection for very different phenotypes. If HVF are selectively harvested from a population, the remaining fish in that population may be less effective in providing parental care, potentially reducing reproductive output. The strong angling pressure in many freshwater systems, and therefore the potential for this to occur in the wild, necessitate management approaches that recognize the potential evolutionary consequences of angling."

[WRB]

What gets over looked with animals we base preconceived ideas about, like memory and brain size is geneic instinct. You don't teach a bird dog to hunt birds, they are genetically wired to hunt birds and all we do is teach them to behave in a manner we want them to.

Animals like bass must learn instantly where to find food and what food is, they are also part of the food chain and must learn that fact quickly. This learning ability is survival instinct, if they don't have it, they don't survive.

The soft plastic worm doesn't give off many negative signals to bass, the only negatives are color, line, hook, weight , unnatural smells and movements. What has and continues to happen is a specific size, shape and color combination becomes the "hot" worm for a season or two, then dies off. Perfect example was the green weenie era or worms. We had green weenies in red, black, blue flakes, light and dark green, light and dark brown. Today it's pumpkin or watermelon, not a combination of 2 colors that is the " hot" worm. What happened to the green weenie? Why did bass everywhere stop eating it? Did anglers tire of catching bass on weenies or did the bass learn to avoid it.

Tom

PS, the DeFresco bass is part of the world record bass legacy. This 21.1 bass, including the 2.5 lb diving weight was identicle to a 19.8 lb bass caught at Miramar lake a few days earlier. The 2.5 lb diving weight was subtracted from this bass and stands at 19.1. Fraud was never proven.....