Does UV on salmon lures really work?

newer study, showing that salmon eyes change, interesting that trout's seem to not change as much as still can perceive UV light


Abstract​

Colour vision relies on retinal photoreceptors that express a different predominant visual pigment protein (opsin). In several vertebrates, the primary opsin expressed by a photoreceptor can change throughout ontogeny, although the molecular factors that influence such regulation are poorly understood. One of these factors is thyroid hormone which, together with its receptors, modulates opsin expression in the retinas of multiple vertebrates including rodents and salmonid fishes. In the latter, thyroid hormone induces a switch in opsin expression from SWS1 (ultraviolet light sensitive) to SWS2 (short wavelength or blue light sensitive) in the single cone photoreceptors of the retina. The actions of other hormones on opsin expression have not been investigated. In the present study, we used a transgenic strain of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kitsutch) with enhanced levels of circulating growth hormone compared to that of wild siblings to assess the effects of this hormone on the SWS1 to SWS2 opsin switch. Transgenic fish showed a developmentally accelerated opsin switch compared to size-matched controls as assessed by immunohistological and in situ hybridisation labelling of photoreceptors and by quantification of transcripts using quantitative polymerase chain reaction. This accelerated switch led to a different spectral sensitivity maximum, under a middle to long wavelength adapting background, from ultraviolet (λmax ~ 380 nm) in controls to short wavelengths (λmax ~ 430 nm) in transgenics, demonstrating altered colour vision. The effects of growth hormone over-expression were independent of circulating levels of thyroid hormone (triiodothyronine), the hormone typically associated with opsin switches in vertebrates.
 

Animals

Wild stock chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) were obtained from the Capilano River hatchery (Vancouver, BC, Canada) at various stages of embryonic development starting at the eyed egg. Two sets of 10 to 20 embryos were collected at each sampling date for opsin transcript detection by reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and in situ hybridization.

conclusions. The sequence of cone opsin appearance in salmonid fishes is similar to that in mammals, in which a violet-blue (SWS1) opsin is expressed first followed by a red (M/LWS) opsin. This sequence is different from that in zebrafish, goldfish, and chick, in which red and green opsins are expressed first. As in mammals, rhodopsin expression in salmonid fishes arises after the first cone opsin. The findings show similarity in the sequence of opsin expression between a group of lower vertebrates, the salmonid fishes, and mammals.
 
i seen this online and i think this is the study the author is talking about https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cne.20879

"Most research indicates that salmonids have cones to detect UV light when small, but as the fish grow these cones gradually disappear. Their diet in their early period of life consists of zooplankton and other small creatures that reflect UV light, but as the fish get larger they can no longer filter such food with their gillrakers. This is given as the main reason why no UV receptors are found in fish above 2 years old.

Other studies, however, have shown that new temporary UV receptors are created annually to coincide with the spawning migration and that these are used to detect polarised light as a navigational aid.

This would mean that returning seatrout and salmon do have some ability to see UV but I have yet to see any evidence that would lead me to believe that this is used for prey detection. It would seem unlikely, both because this is the time when their appetite is suppressed and, if it was a useful tool for finding food, it is logical that they would retain it throughout their life."




"The retinas of many vertebrates have cone photoreceptors that express multiple visual pigments. In many of these animals, including humans, the original cones to appear in the retina (which express UV or blue opsin) may change opsin types, giving rise to new spectral phenotypes. Here we used microspectrophotometry and in situ hybridization with cDNA probes to study the distribution of UV and blue cones in the retinas of four species of Pacific salmon (coho, chum, chinook, and pink salmon), in the Atlantic salmon, and in the rainbow/steelhead trout. In Pacific salmon and in the trout, all single cones express a UV opsin at hatching (λmax of the visual pigment ∼365 nm), and these cones later transform into blue cones by opsin changeover (λmax of the blue visual pigment ∼434 nm). Cones undergoing UV opsin downregulation exhibit either of two spectral absorbance profiles. The first is characterized by UV and blue absorbance peaks, with blue absorbance dominating the base of the outer segment. The second shows UV absorbance diminishing from the outer segment tip to the base, with no sign of blue absorbance. The first absorbance profile indicates a transformation from UV to blue phenotype by opsin changeover, while the second type suggests that the cone is undergoing apoptosis. These two events (transformation and loss of corner cones) are closely associated in time and progress from ventral to dorsal retina. Each double cone member contains green (λmax ∼510 nm) or red (λmax ∼565 nm) visual pigment (double cones are green/red pairs), and, like the rods (λmax ∼508 nm), do not exhibit opsin changeover. Unlike Pacific salmonids, the Atlantic salmon shows a mixture of UV and blue cones and a partial loss of corner cones at hatching. This study establishes the UV-to-blue cone transformation as a general feature of retinal growth in Pacific salmonids (genus Oncorhynchus). J. Comp. Neurol. 495:213–235, 2006. © 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc."
Yes and they also have night vision in freshwater. The reason I use UV optical bightners, glow and high light refraction substrates is because of low light effects such as shimmers, faint glimmers etc. It's about shades, contrasts and depth illutions of the surface of the lure. Regardless salmon and trout have similar sight. My creations have proven to work at all depths without flashers. What they see is not what I see, whatever it is that makes them strike is from a combination of all the assets applied from my recipes.
 
Yes and they also have night vision in freshwater. The reason I use UV optical bightners, glow and high light refraction substrates is because of low light effects such as shimmers, faint glimmers etc. It's about shades, contrasts and depth illutions of the surface of the lure. Regardless salmon and trout have similar sight. My creations have proven to work at all depths without flashers. What they see is not what I see, whatever it is that makes them strike is from a combination of all the assets applied from my recipes.
Remember some hoochies work better than others, namely the hoochies that have been enhanced with optical brightners in their patterns. :)
 
Another tip if you are a hunter - do not wash you hunting clothes in any detergent that carries optical brightners in their ingredients. The animals will easily spot you.
 
Actually other way around, I asked Deryk to get the custom kinetic flashers built for me as a special order. A few back and forth attempts before OKi got it right. My custom order was through Deryk as he had the relationship with Brian. Its still a custom run even today, not that it really matters because many of us have great ideas on tackle.
Yep like I mentioned OKI had it first, my mistake as I remembered you as a hot spot Fan when Deryk(PNT) ordered them for you. Tons of people, more than most of us know, have had a hand in shifting the tackle industry. The noteriety means nothing to me, it was all the education that I received along my journey, from so many iconic companies over my lifetime. The littlest tidbit of education is what I thrived on. The rest is all balled up into passion and love of life. Nothing else matters to me.
 
Last edited:
Yep like I mentioned OKI had it first, my mistake as I remembered you as a hot spot Fan when Deryk(PNT) ordered them for you. Tons of people, more than most of us know, have had a hand in shifting the tackle industry. The noteriety means nothing to me, it was all the education that I received along my journey, from so many iconic companies over my lifetime. The littlest tidbit of education is what I thrived on. The rest is all balled up into passion and love of life. Nothing else matters to me.
Thanks Rob, like you the passion is experimentation to continuously improve the art of fishing. And from recognition standpoint, Brian was the first to my knowledge to identify the power of kinetic tape on flashers. He gave Deryk 3 prototypes to test fish, and luckily for me, Deryk asked if I could take them up with me to Nootka and test. One of them was lights out amazing, which led to us immediately ordering a special run to get more made. That's where the love affair with kinetic tape started.

Back to experimentation. Sounds from the research on UV receptors and sensitivity studies that as salmon mature they become less able to detect UV and more able to detect blue light - which sort of makes sense because when they migrate out from rivers into the ocean, they need to shift from foraging in shallow water to deep water where blue and green light is the last to fade out at depth. Using more blues and greens might be something to investigate a bit more, and perhaps even some glow flecks to help create that contrast and shape pattern you mentioned. I may buy one of the those UV pens and do a field test too.
 
Thanks Rob, like you the passion is experimentation to continuously improve the art of fishing. And from recognition standpoint, Brian was the first to my knowledge to identify the power of kinetic tape on flashers. He gave Deryk 3 prototypes to test fish, and luckily for me, Deryk asked if I could take them up with me to Nootka and test. One of them was lights out amazing, which led to us immediately ordering a special run to get more made. That's where the love affair with kinetic tape started.

Back to experimentation. Sounds from the research on UV receptors and sensitivity studies that as salmon mature they become less able to detect UV and more able to detect blue light - which sort of makes sense because when they migrate out from rivers into the ocean, they need to shift from foraging in shallow water to deep water where blue and green light is the last to fade out at depth. Using more blues and greens might be something to investigate a bit more, and perhaps even some glow flecks to help create that contrast and shape pattern you mentioned. I may buy one of the those UV pens and do a field test too.
Yes that is correct, we are on the same page. I have known Brian since I was 21 years and at that time working for Canadian Tire running the tackle department. I met him a number of years prior to him knocking off Jack Gaunts's Hot Spot flasher design. Jack was a great guy, wish he was still around. Brian did have Kinetic on flashers first. WTP had it in their product offering for many years before anyone here on this coast decided to try it. Now it's one of the most popular tapes in North America as a whole. The most imortent component to finishing in my opinion is to devlop patterns that create dimention over the substrate at all depth ranges.
 
Last edited:
Plain all chrome wonder spoon out fishes most other spoons I use.
Especially down deep off shore. Virtually no light left below 200 feet. Paint never gets chewed off cuz there ain't any. I have a few that are 20 plus years old.
I sometimes paint a blue stripe with dollar store nail polish if I'm feeling crazy.
 
Ha ha, I put that shat on everything...now only available in US. Thankfully I have an ample supply.
LOL Impossible to be effective on everything. PNT has carried it for years and continues to have good levels of stock most of the time.
 
I would appear that UV on salmon lures is very effective at catching the eye of a fisherman scanning a wall of tackle at Canadian Tire.
LOL. Lets go back to the 1950's or 1960's even the 70's and see who catches what with the gear of the day. A majory of angler success today is because of modernday finishing, along with downriggers and electronics. Take it all away and there will be much more struggling. We have become way more efficient due to the type of gear we now use. In saying this anything that caught a fish 200 years ago will still catch a fish today at some point. If you know what you are looking for in your tackle, then you more than likely are in the top 10% of successful anglers. Back in the day quite a lot less fish were caught. Most applied colours back before the 1950's were flat and we had way more fish. Looking at historic collectors catalogs, the lures in them will keep catching fish, most are metal finishes. I do well with metal, but I also understand why I am successful with them. As I have mentioned previously the two most successful colour tones are Black and White. The two most successful enhancements are Glow and Optical Brightner. The reason hoochies are coloued the way they are is to give it depth and contrast. Same for most plugs. To accomplish it correctly on spoons is a long process for most so it is rarely done in production, although some have done it a bit. Put all the details together in these articles and they do offer a reason why to continue using Optical Brightners.
 
Back
Top