Are Bass Color-Blind?

[RoLo]

This question has been raised a few times in our forum. Although man will never be able to see through the eyes of a bass,

scientific evidence (anatomical dissection) sheds a great deal of light on the answer.

In the past, I've briefly mentioned "rod and cone vision" and the "color spectrum",

but for the benefit of our science-oriented members, I think the subject deserves more than a flippant mention:

Rod & Cone Vision

The eyes of vertebrates are constituted by two different cell-types: rod cells and cone cells. Some animals possess

only rod vision, while others possess both rod and cone vision. Rod cells cannot perceive color but are better light collectors

than cone cells. Inversely, cone cells are able to perceive color but are poor gatherers of light. Animals that see in shades of gray

(achromatic) possess only rod cells while lacking cone cells. In contrast, vertebrates that see in color (chromatic)

possess both rod and cone vision. Furthermore, animals that feed mostly during the day (diurnal) possess a majority of cone cells.

Not surprisingly, those that feed mostly at night (nocturnal) possess more rod cells.

Color Spectrum

Walleyes possess both rod and cone vision, so based on circumstantial evidence, walleyes have color perception.

However, walleyes possess more rod cells than cone cells, therefore they are gifted with excellent night vision,

but have poor color perception. Due to their poor color perception, fluorescent orange and fluorescent chartreuse

have become two of the most popular colors for walleye jigs.

Black bass also possess rod-and-cone vision, and are likewise deemed to have color perception.

Contrary to walleyes though, bass possess more cone cells than rod cells. Consequently, bass are classified as diurnal predators

with excellent color perception. Fluorescent orange and chartreuse are not necessary for bass, but have they're place

in murky water and during overcast skies. Hues that are situated in the center of the 'color spectrum' appear to be the most visible

to bass under the widest range of lighting conditions. As the light source is reduced, certain colors will disappear before others

which is based on the frequency of their light wave. The order of color disappearance is as follows (from first to last to disappear):

> Red (The largest and most easily diffused light wave) "Infrared" is the invisible border beside red, and is used for night vision

> Orange (Second sloppiest wave, a combination of red and yellow)

> Yellow

> Green (Midpoint in the color spectrum - A combination of yellow and blue)

> Blue

> Indigo (Essentially the purple family)

> Violet (The finest, most penetrating light wave) "Ultraviolet" is the invisible border beside violet and is the most destructive wave

You will notice that "Green" is situated in the center of the color spectrum. Green is also the most prevalent color used by

Mother Nature (grass, foliage, algae, etc). Not unexpectedly, "green" is probably the most popular color

among bass fisherman too, but it hides behind the name "Watermelon"

Roger

[Catt]

Very interesting  

[Gorgebassman]

THANKS!! RoLo I never fail to learn something from this site.

[Raul]

Another thing to add. When we talk about the ability to see color or not the histological evidence shows the animal has both types of cells, rods and cones, the fish is able to see color, but when we talk about seeing colors we immediately assume fish can see colors the way we do, there 's where the thing gets tricky, we assume, that 's the point, but what we assume can ( and in most cases it is ) be entirely different from our perception, for starters fish like bass can 't see colors the way we do because they see color like we do with polarized sunglasses, they have another type of color perception.

Back in the old days EVERYBODY said that dogs were color blind, now we know dogs are not color blind, they can see green and blue but can 't see red so they can 't see colors like yellow or orange, they don 't have the cells to see red. Wonder how a predatory bird like a hawk can see a small prey like a mouse several hundred meters away up in the sky ? Nope, it doesn 't look at the mouse, mouses and many other rodents create paths as they move around and mark them with urine, the hawk is capable of seing such trails because under UV light the urine glows like neon, the fresher the urine the more it glows, birds like hawks have cells to detect UV light, the bird is not looking at the mouse, it 's looking at the urine trail left behind by the mouse, where the trail stops the mouse is.

[RoLo]

Another thing to add. When we talk about the ability to see color or not the histological evidence shows the animal has both types of cells, rods and cones, the fish is able to see color, but when we talk about seeing colors we immediately assume fish can see colors the way we do, there 's where the thing gets tricky, we assume, that 's the point, but what we assume can ( and in most cases it is ) be entirely different from our perception, for starters fish like bass can 't see colors the way we do because they see color like we do with polarized sunglasses, they have another type of color perception.

That's a good addition Raul, and it's certainly true.

I often use the example below to explain what might be called "subjective color identity".

Someone is born with a visual defect, we'll call that someone Mr. X

When Mr. X looks at any "green" object, to him the object appears "BLUE".

One day Mr. X is standing alongside you and I and a "green" car rides past.

You make the statement, "Hey, I know that guy in the "green" car" and Mr. X is listening to you.

For the rest of his life, Mr. X may describe "blue" objects using the term "GREEN".

Although he's sees a different color than you and I, he uses the correct term to describe that color.

This means that Mr. X may live and die without anyone ever knowing about his visual defect, including Mr. X himself!

Wild isn't it?

Roger

[Guest avid]

the fresher the urine the more it glows

Very True.

I let the neighbors kid in my pool.

Couldn't go near it without sunglasses  8-)

[RoLo]

the fresher the urine the more it glows

Very True.

I let the neighbors kid in my pool.

Couldn't go near it without sunglasses 8-)

 You left out the nose-clip

[Needemp]

the fresher the urine the more it glows

Very True.

I let the neighbors kid in my pool.

Couldn't go near it without sunglasses  8-)

That's hilarious

They may not see colors as we do, but they can distinguish between colors. A guy named Dr. Don Mccoy of the University of KY did some experiments with bass in the labs. He found that bass could be trained to distinguish all colors between red and green, but not equally. However they had trouble telling the difference in different shades of blues and violets. Another guy from the University of Illinois trained bass to approach a target having the correct color to receive a food reward but received a shock if they approached the wrong color. The bass trained this way easily distinguished between even minor shade variances of red and green. Intense yellows could be discerned, but pale yellows and pinks appeared to be interpreted simply as "light". Dark blues, purples, browns, black and even dark shades of red and green were hard to be discerned. These are quotes from Pure Fishing's Kieth Jones, PhD, his book "Knowing Bass". It is never stated, but can be assumed that all these experiments were done in clear water.

When I first learned about how bass see color, I tried to apply it to catching bass. The only real conclusion I came up with was either use the exact color of the forage I am trying to imitate (and let's face it, artificial lures just don't look or reflect exactly like the real thing) or go by the existing rule of clear water- use colors to hide your lure and dark water- use bright colors so they can see your lure.

[RoLo]

When I first learned about how bass see color, I tried to apply it to catching bass. The only real conclusion I came up with was either use the exact color of the forage I am trying to imitate (and let's face it, artificial lures just don't look or reflect exactly like the real thing) or go by the existing rule of clear water- use colors to hide your lure and dark water- use bright colors so they can see your lure.

Studies by Mepps have taken the color scheme one step farther.

They claim that during winter and early spring when the metabolism of fish is low,

"bright" colors are better for triggering a strike. Oppositely, bass in mid-summer have a

very high metabolism, when Mepps claims that it's better to tone down the color-saturation and brightness.

At the least, it's food for thought

The concept of bright lures in dark water however, may not work so well. A color is only as bright as the existing light.

Once the light source is reduced (by depth, clouds or murky water) the light goes out, so to speak.

For this same reason, "black" is usually regarded as the best of all colors in low-light conditions.

Using black is giving up on luminosity, and pulling the other way. The thinking is that black stands the best chance

of contrasting against its background which will usually harbor a trace amount of available light (e.g. a moonlit night).

In other words, it's all about "contrast". One thing is sure, it's a fascintating subject

Roger

[Fish Man]

while all this science is interesting and helpful there is only one sure fire way to tell wat a bass can and cant see,and that is time on the water  

[RoLo]

while all this science is interesting and helpful there is only one sure fire way to tell wat a bass can and cant see,and that is time on the water

Well actually, this is really not about fishing, but is more about the fish itself.

The countless variables that enter into angling itself, tend to shroud the true underlying causes.

By doing our "homework" while we're not on the water, we can make the best use of our time on the water.

By the same token, I wouldn't want a surgeon who gained his knowledge by time on the job

Roger

[Fish Man]

thats a very good point lol  ;D

[Vorlin]

Not to be too picky but I noticed a small error in the original. Light's ability to penetrates air, clouds, water, etc. depends on it's wavelength, yes... but it's the longer wavelengths, or lower frequencies, that penetrate best.

This is why the last color you can see in the sky at dusk is red and the first color to disappear is blue. The sunlight has to come across the atmosphere at an angle, making it travel through a lot more air than it does when it's coming straight down. Blue light can not penetrate all that air very well but red does.

It's part of my original trade... I was a radio tech in the Navy. We had to know the math for what frequencies to use when and what would or wouldn't penetrate cloud cover. Submarine radios are the craziest... the wavelengths are so long that it's measured in cycles per minute, not second, but those frequencies penetrates even the earth itself.

Vorlin

[RoLo]

Light's ability to penetrates air, clouds, water, etc. depends on it's wavelength, yes... but it's the longer wavelengths, or lower frequencies, that penetrate best.

This discussion is beginning to get interesting

Vorlin, correct me if I'm wrong.

Frequency alone (nanometers) does not determine light penetration, because it varies according to the medium involved.

For instance, it's my understanding that ultraviolet light is essentially blocked by glass (silicone), yet glass is easily penetrated

by white light (visible spectrum). On the other hand, ultraviolet light penetrates water very well.

Okay, my question is this, are you saying that "blue" is the first color to disappear underwater,

and that "red" is the last color to be scattered underwater?

Roger

[ValleyBoy]

If bass were truly colorblind than would that mean that the only things the color on our lures are capable of catching is fisherman?   ;D

[senile1]

Light's ability to penetrates air, clouds, water, etc. depends on it's wavelength, yes... but it's the longer wavelengths, or lower frequencies, that penetrate best.

This discussion is beginning to get interesting

Vorlin, correct me if I'm wrong.

Frequency alone (nanometers) does not determine light penetration, because it varies according to the medium involved.

For instance, it's my understanding that ultraviolet light is essentially blocked by glass (silicone), yet glass is easily penetrated

by white light (visible spectrum). On the other hand, ultraviolet light penetrates water very well.

Okay, my question is this, are you saying that "blue" is the first color to disappear underwater,

and that "red" is the last color to be scattered underwater?

Roger

My understanding of the colors that bass, and other fishies, are able to see is similar to Roger's.  I've attached a link that explains the filtering of colors underwater.  It would seem that, when underwater, red disappears first, according to this.  

http://www.deep-six.com/page77.htm

[flyphisher #]

Do all fish see the same? Do bass and trout,for example see differently? Obviously there are enviromental differences that may cause them to percieve things differently....but something else to think about is:

I have been on trout streams some days that the shade of dubbing, tail, wings, etc. or some minute difference in the fly pattern would be the difference in whether you catch fish or not. Fished midge hatches where there are millions of small black bugs everywhere and unless you had the exact #26 midge immitation you were out for casting practice.

So i think they see color more and see more period than we could ever imagine.....but due to the way their sight works differnt varables in their enviroment make the colors look different at different times, therefore some colors work better some days than other....

[FatBoy]

There are three phenomena invovled here: absorption, scattering and refraction.  

Refraction has to do with light bouncing off of or penentrating through a surface (like the air/water surface).  This has to do with the light's polarization (up/down or side to side).  Up/down goes through a surface more than side to side.  Polarized sunglasses are polarized up/down.  As a result the side to side light that bounces off the surface is blocked while the up/down light that comes out of the water is not.  That's why you can see better below the surface with polarized glasses.  BUT this has nothing to do with color.

Absorption has to with light being absorbed by an object.  Water (pure water) does not absorb any of the visible wavelengths.  So this is not an issue with the color of lures either.  Now if the water is stained there are colored molecules dissolved in the water and different colors can "disappear" in the water depending on what is dissolved.  

Scattering has to do with light bouncing off of and being bent by particles.  Light is scattered by particles that are about the same size as the wavelength of the light.  Red has the longest wavelength and is scattered by larger particles; blue/violet is shorter and is scattered by the smallest particles.  There can be all kinds of particles in water from microorganisms to itty bitty dirt particles.  But typically they are "big".  So red is scattered most (i.e. first).  That's why red light is the first to "disappear" in water.  How deep you have to go before red disappears depends on how clear the water is.  The clear it is, the deeper the light goes and the deeper you can see red.  

We will have a quiz on this next week and this material WILL be covered on the final exam  ;D

[Raul]

Here we are having trouble between wavelength and luminosity, we know that light is formed by multiple spectrums, the ones we can see ( colors ) and the ones we can 't see ( UV and above, infrared and below ), that one is measures in nanometers but luminosity is another thing, luminosity is measured in lumens or candles, if the luminosity is high ( like in the middle of the day on a cloudless sky ) the light that can penetrate will be more so less visible colors will be filtered, also, add to that that the light penetration is inversly proportional to the turbidity ( ammount of suspended particles ) and to the "color" of the water ( dyes ) there 's a huge element of uncertainty when it comes to those tables you see printed telling that at X ammount of feet Y or Z color is no longer visible, yeah they tell us at what depth that color dissapears but they are not telling us the ammount of lumens used to do the test nor the turbidity of the water used to perform the test.

[George Welcome]

All of this and the simple answer is: Dark colors in dark water and light colors in clear water will catch you all the bass you can handle with no assumption or guesswork involved.

However, as soon as one of these green, (are they green?) monsters comes up and talks to me, I promise to let everyone know.

[bassbob08]

Will this ? ever be answered :

[RoLo]

All of this and the simple answer is: Dark colors in dark water and light colors in clear water will catch you all the bass you can handle with no assumption or guesswork involved.

I fail to see how that would eliminate guesswork.

> You are fishing in a lightly-stained lake. After the cast, your lure settles to the bottom in 15-ft of water       (that's DARK)

> About midway through your retrieve the lure has mounted a sunken hump and is now in 3-1/2-ft of water (that's BRIGHT)

> On your very next cast, you skip the lure waaaay back under a large dock                                                        (that's DARK)

> As the lure emerges from under the dock it's riding in full sunlight in 3 ft of water                                     (that's BRIGHT)

> Your next cast targets maidencane and the lure is running about 3 feet deep in full sunlight              (that's BRIGHT)

> About midway through your retrieve the sun is eclipsed by a large dark cloud                                                 HHmmm

Roger

[George Welcome]

Fisheating Creek has some of the heaviest Tannic stained water in Florida. You can count the pepples on the bottom. That's clear. Okeechobee has some of the most turbid water in Florida. You can barely see your lure in the water. That's dark.

Based on the "changing level of light" theory, one needs to fish with self changing lures.

I don't know much, but I do know that dark lures in dark water, and light lures in clear water works quite well. Perhaps this is why I have such a successful guide business.

I am a big believer in the "keep it simple" method of retrieving these green fish. The more difficult you get with thought process and practise, the more difficult the retrieving becomes.

Let's see what door this opens. LMAO, not at you, but at where this can and probably will lead.

[RoLo]

Let's see what door this opens. LMAO, not at you, but at where this can and probably will lead.

I will say, it has been interesting.

Color is the bottom rung of importance, so every angler enjoys free reign with color (confidence tool).

As you mentioned George, under changing light levels we'd need to have self-changing lures (probably in the wings).

In the interest of "visibility" (not edibility), I try to incorporate both a light and dark hue within the same lure.

I'd be interested in your opinion of mixed tones within the same lure, or do you prefer lures with a single hue?

Roger

[George Welcome]

Most often that is decided by the speed of the lure. Hard baits are multi-colored to present flash and flash depends highly on ambient light. Soft baits are for the most part uni-colored, however the presence of lack of ambient light may call for the lack or need for flash.

The faster the bait the more the need for flash.