If Bass Are Colorblind To Blue, Why Is There No High Vis Blue Line?

[mjseverson24]

This quote form Dr. Keith Jones in response to the ability of the bass to see UV.  I have tendency to trust biology over beliefs when it come to bass sight. 

 

The bass retina contains only two types of color cones: a red and a green. They do not possess a blue cone, and certainly not a UV cone. Moreover, assuming bass follow the pattern of other centrarchids, their ocular media (the fluid in their eyes) strongly absorb light with wavelengths shorter than 450 nm, meaning that very little UV light would ever reach their retina anyway. So, no, bass do not see UV light.

 

If bass do not have a blue cone in their retinas then they are certainly colorblind to blue.

I am not sure who Dr. Keith Jones is, but he is probably not as smart as he thinks he is... there is a huge flaw in his line of reasoning on this one... Bass have different eyes than humans, but they also have different brains. dr jones is assuming that there is only one way to perceive blue visually, and that is to have the exact same eye structure as humans... while we do "know" that the way humans have the ability to see different colors is through the rod and cone configurations in our eyes, to assume that there is only one type of eye structure that can detect certain colors is just stupid... the only thing we know is this---> We know the spectrum of colors that humans are able to see, because we can look at things and report what we see... Dr. Jones may in fact be correct with his statement, but the true answer should be we don't know for sure but we believe based on our limited understanding of this subject that bass can best see colors in this region, and have a very difficult time seeing the others... this statement leaves room to be incorrect, and any decent scientist does not make a statement of fact based on a theory, it is just that, a theory... I think the physical evidence that bass seem to prefer certain colors outside their so called spectrum under certain conditions, suggests that they can distinctly distinguish these colors, even if they do not see them the same way you or I do... 

 

Mitch

[Hooligan]

This quote form Dr. Keith Jones in response to the ability of the bass to see UV.  I have tendency to trust biology over beliefs when it come to bass sight. 

 

The bass retina contains only two types of color cones: a red and a green. They do not possess a blue cone, and certainly not a UV cone. Moreover, assuming bass follow the pattern of other centrarchids, their ocular media (the fluid in their eyes) strongly absorb light with wavelengths shorter than 450 nm, meaning that very little UV light would ever reach their retina anyway. So, no, bass do not see UV light.

 

If bass do not have a blue cone in their retinas then they are certainly colorblind to blue.

Keith is a great guy, and extremely well thought of.  He's every bit as smart as he thinks he is, by the weight he carries in fisheries biology and research.

Here's the catch, though.  What he's saying is very true.  Bass do not see true blues.  They lack the blue receptors.  They don't see UV because of the wavelength.  What he went on to say in that paper, if it is the same one I think that you're referencing is that the reason blues and purples are so successful under a large variety of conditions is that they are primary offset colors.  They change in hue under water and, as a result, have a tendency to be more recognizable in profile.  They may not see the color on the whole, if you will, but they can see the large difference between the color of your blue jig and the surrounding water/cover.  UV baits work in much the same fashion, as it is understood at this point.  It isn't really the UV color, but the lack of continuity between the bait and surrounding area, creating a very visible profile.  That's how Doc explained it to me when I asked the very question.  It isn't so much that they're blind to it, but more the effect that it changes it to what is assumed to be a deep brown with great differentiation.

Quoting Bill Dance under any circumstance regarding color is pretty funny.  His evidence is anecdotal at best, given he's been one of the most vociferous people I've ever heard in the industry preaching about how color has to be right.  Considering that bass can well see baitfish, the reason they can't eat them all is a matter of cover and structure, not color...

[TorqueConverter]

Keith is a great guy, and extremely well thought of.  He's every bit as smart as he thinks he is, by the weight he carries in fisheries biology and research.

Here's the catch, though.  What he's saying is very true.  Bass do not see true blues.  They lack the blue receptors.  They don't see UV because of the wavelength.  What he went on to say in that paper, if it is the same one I think that you're referencing is that the reason blues and purples are so successful under a large variety of conditions is that they are primary offset colors.  They change in hue under water and, as a result, have a tendency to be more recognizable in profile.  They may not see the color on the whole, if you will, but they can see the large difference between the color of your blue jig and the surrounding water/cover.  UV baits work in much the same fashion, as it is understood at this point.  It isn't really the UV color, but the lack of continuity between the bait and surrounding area, creating a very visible profile.  That's how Doc explained it to me when I asked the very question.  It isn't so much that they're blind to it, but more the effect that it changes it to what is assumed to be a deep brown with great differentiation.

Quoting Bill Dance under any circumstance regarding color is pretty funny.  His evidence is anecdotal at best, given he's been one of the most vociferous people I've ever heard in the industry preaching about how color has to be right.  Considering that bass can well see baitfish, the reason they can't eat them all is a matter of cover and structure, not color...

 I pulled that tidbit from an article about UV containing quotes from people on all sides of the UV argument.  If you have the full paper from Dr. Jones, please share.  I'd love to read it.  It was the remark about the absence of blue cones in the quote that caught my attention.

 

You're a bit over my head at the moment, but does blues and purples (red + blue) having color changing properties mean that they are shades of grey or in the case of purple, shades of red mixed with shades of grey?  "color changing properties" is a bit confusing as it implies blue turns to red or something.  Also, I hear it being tossed around that bass see red better than humans.  If true does this imply that the red receptors in the eyes are disproportionate in either size or quantity to the yellow receptors?

 

Neat stuff either way.  IMO way to much of what we think bass are capable of are is based on anecdotal evidence collected in the field by lay persons.  I'd like to see biology's take on the ability to see colors, precisely which colors and how much of each.

 

:EDIT: I just read the quote from Dr. Jones again.  In the quote he clearly states a green receptor.  Green is a product of yellow and blue.  If the animal is colorblind to blue, then greens are shades of yellow.  How can a green receptor exist and not a blue?  I would think it would be impossible to see green without the ability to see both yellow and blue but then again, I'm not colorblind.   

[J Francho]

I'm colorblind blue. I still see blue as "blue." One eye is worse than the other. I just can't discriminate hue always, especially when it cones to teal or blue-green and turquoise. What this has to do with bass vision, I don't know. But I can still match my socks to my pants. Lol.

[MarkH024]

http://www.overstockbait.com/Power-Pro-Super-Slick-p/31100300150a.htm

 

^^^  If that's not hi-vis blue I don't know what is.

 

Either way, I've caught enough fish in ultra clear water with braid to know it's not a deal breaker.  I absolutely believe in ultra clear water a smaller diameter/less visible line is or can be helpful but not a must.  At the end of the day, if you plop a bait in front of a fish, it's going to zone in on that bait and decide if it wants to eat or not. Line color and visibility is on the bottom of the totem pole for importance when I fish as I find other factors to be much more important. 

[WRB]

Both Gene Gilliland and Keith Jones are well known biologist in the bass fishing community because they publish articles in Bassmaster and quoted a lot, this doesn't mean they are well respected with their peers.

We as bass anglers read what is published and take from it what fits our experience on the water.

Marlin were long thought to be color blind based on color receptors missing in their eye. Research by biologist discovered that marlin have good color vision confirming what anglers experience when using a wide variety of colors in lures. What Australian biologist discovered was marlin see what they described as blue shift allowing the predator to clearly distinguish a wide range of colors of baitfish the billfish feed on.

The primary colors; red, yellow, green make up the base the human eye and brain see as a color spectrum. Applying the same science to fish living and evolving underwater to human vision may lead to false assumptions.

Tom

[*Hootie]

But I can still match my socks to my pants. Lol.

Me too but why do people laugh at me when I wear my Argyle pants.

Hootie