|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #113
Just read it again this morning, some great input by all and loved TC input at the time, refreshingly brilliant 
Wish they all still posted. All good info and thought provoking for a bloke in a shed.
And edit - does anybody know where I can get a good quality winterised nut oil
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #114
Totally agree, Anglers pre soak baits as they believe there more readibly taken as the fish think they've been in the water a lot longer and are someway safer.. I think it's a case of there more palatable. And a lot easier to eat.
I've used mainline Cell for a bit in the past. They going like soggy bread not long after being in the water ( might give you some idea of its make up..  ). But that's the reason I think th Carp can't get enough of it..
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #113
I've found that pre- soaked and therefore soft baits are eaten more quickly and in greater quantities than rock hard ones. Seems to pass through quicker comes out like paste.
|
|
|
|
That was a nice read...
Digestibility, often mentioned in the incorrect context.
Digestibility is the amount of food that can be absorbed and converted into nutrition, it isnt the same as being able to pass through a fishes gut. Thats gut transit time.
If its not digested it doesnt bung them up as its just shat out, like sweetcorn skins.
Several posts mention how fast they can crap it out. Some mention carp being bunged up with bait. Lots of variables here...
Do soft pasty baits pass through more easily, or do baits with more texture pass through quicker due to peristalsis!
Water temperature is the biggest effect on gut transit times. Also, consider a carps gut, a long pipe with no stomach to get bloated. The faster they push it in one end the faster it comes out the other end.
I have done many tank tests to witness how feeding a trickle can slow down gut transit, but give them a double dose and the crap gets shot out everywhere and I'd need to vacuum the tank so I dont create an ammonia spike and overwhelm my poor filter bacteria.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #111
 I just like things that work well, under the right circumstances 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #110
Not me I like expensive 😂
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #108
You need to read all 6 pages, it has some good properties one of which is its cheaper than fishmeal...some people like cheap
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #108
Yes, that's why Peter and I will stick to using fish meals.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #106
Why use something that has a negative effect?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #106
Just pm'ed you, mate! Many thanks!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #105
Just dragged out my copy of Handbook on Ingredients for Aquaculture feeds. It says that poultry meal as a sole protein source depresses performance. it is recommended that for omnivorous fish a maximum level of 35% is used but with other sources (fishmeal) and is only used to replace some of the fishmeal. It also says you should consider adding lysine, methionine and tryptophan as these are low. If you PM me your email address i can send you some pictures of the pages on this
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #104
Nice! I also will keep my eye on new ingredients, but leave the poultry meals for now.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #103
If you have one good mix then just use it....like I say I have been on the same bait for 10 years now
With spare time due to car racing being off this year I am playing around with a new mix but more out of interest than need. I am still making and using 1-2kg a week of the old mix 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #102
I currently have a very nice fishmeal mix and a bird/nut/milk mix. I also wanted to add a good meat meal mix, but now I wonder why. If I have both mixes that work well, why? Lol
Think I will let this idea go.
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #101
I never fully tested the BM2 mix, it was 'work in progress' when I packed it all in. In theory though it still had 20% fishmeal so the poultry meal only need to be part utilised.
For the last 10 years I have used the same mix based on the BM1.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #99
Hi Peter, you used poultry meal in your BM2 mix. May I conclude that you don't think the lesser digestability is a problem in our baits (if they are a mix with other ingredients)?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #98
Yes an no I total understand your point but my reply #27 still stands.
I want to feel I am feeding them a balanced diet. I treat my children the same but they still eat 'other' stuff at school so, based on what you are saying, should I not worry about the quality of what I feed them at home?
Another way of looking at it is that they (the fish, not my children!) spend x amount of energy feeding each day. If they spend some of that energy eating a non-HNV (HNV and FLAA go hand in hand) bait we have chucked in they are wasting that energy and will not benefit from the food. Yes they will certainly survive but I want more than that for the fish I target. I want them to thrive not just survive
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #96
As your link shows the data is out there if you look for it
|
|
|
|
|
FLAA issues surely assume the fish eat only your bait. This may be true in a fish tank but in a lake they eat a wide variety of very different carp baits and naturals on a daily basis and so the FLAA issue has to be greatly diminished.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #94
Yes, it's a good one.
Concerning digestibility i wouldn't worry if you use around 15%.
It all depends on the other ingredients of the mix.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #95
Hi Peter,
I found this one: link
In which they state: "Protein in fish meal (83.8%) and soybean meal (69.8%) were significantly more digestible than that of poultry meal (47.2%). Energy digestibility tests gave the following results: fish meal 93.4%, soybean meal 74.7% and poultry meal 63.9%"
|
|
|
|
When reading any data on digestibility do not be mislead by what you read. They often talk about 'In Vitro' and 'pepsin' digestibility, both of these methods are based around how ruminants (cows) or we can digest a product...fish are completely different.
It is possible to find data on fish digestibility but you will have to look harder, normally into various science papers . Certainly any bait ingredient company is just wasting time publishing 'in vitro' or 'pepsin' figures without any real data to say how this effects a fish!
In theory we could make a bait that has a very high protein content that has high digestibility when measured with these methods but is totally un-digestible for a carp. Admittedly it would be hard to do but I recon I could have a good stab at it 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #93
Hi Kenny,
I have this one: https://www.feedstim.com/protein-base/poultry-protein-meal-159.html
This one is spray dried. Is that better digestable?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #90
Have a look if you can get hold of the spray dried version of chicken meal.
I really like to use it in combination with predigested fishmeal!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #91
Sharp! Those 10 percent is for the label (spices, cheese powder or such things) and I have to think/test about those ones. Haven't figured it out.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #90
Have i missed something- what's the missing 10% ?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #89
My current recipe is this:
Poultry meal 25%
Liver meal 10%
CLO 15%
Corn meal 10%
Whey protein concentrate 5%
Pd fishmeal 15%
Silkworm meal 10%
I think th 25 percent would be to much. I thought about changing the poultry meal for insect meal (prosecto) but I understand that I no real good alternative.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #88
I've used meat and bone meal in long term baits and very successfully but only alongside fishmeal not as a replacement.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #87
So, if I read the post no 34 (or that of great blondini), I shouldn't be using poultry meals for baits as a substitute for fish meals. What's left then? I have a birdfood/milk/nut mix and a fishmeal. I wanted to make one extra with meat meals but those aren't properly digestable.
Should I go insect meal?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #75
the sweetcorn post show's he's no flash in 'the pan' (as it were)
great thread this - nice to see some of the old faces posting with some interesting stuff.
hope you're good mart - long time no speak
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #84
So thats why the thread was difficult to read.
Sorry about that 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #84
Good move, made the reading very tricky on my iPad, especially with my eyes 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #35
Had to suppress post as link took the info over page width.
Here is viking text-
In reply to Post #34
Quote:
The digestibility of various diet components as protein sources for common carp, Cyprinus carpio L., at 500–800 g was studied by using an inert marker in the feed and collecting the faeces by stripping. Protein in fish meal (83.8%) and soybean meal (69.8%) were significantly more digestible than that of poultry meal (47.2%). Energy digestibility tests gave the following results: fish meal 93.4%, soybean meal 74.7% and poultry meal 63.9%. It was evident that the ability of carp to digest proteins is very high, and that they can utilize proteins as the main component of their diet.
From here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1365-2109.1997.00825.x
And behold, nuts isnt too good:
Hazelnut meal was evaluated as an alternative protein source to fishmeal in diets for mirror carp, Cyprinus carpio (mean initial weight 18.24±0.08 g). Hazelnut meal was incorporated into diets at levels of 0 (control), 10%, 20%, 30%, or 40%. Diets were tested in triplicate for 12 weeks. Hazelnut meal beyond 10% significantly reduced growth performance in comparison to the control (p<0.05). Feed conversion and protein efficiency ratios were significantly lower in fish fed hazelnut meal higher than 20% (p<0.05). The feed intake, condition factor, and dress-out percentage were not affected by treatment but the viscero-somatic index significantly dropped in fish fed 40% hazelnut meal. High levels of hazelnut meal reduced body moisture and ash but increased lipid concentration. Apparent digestibility coefficients of dry matter and energy were lowest in the diet containing the highest level of hazelnut meal (p<0.05) but those of protein and lipid did not differ. Crude and digestible protein retention were significantly depressed at high hazelnut meal levels. Results suggest that up to 10% hazelnut meal can be incorporated in diets for young mirror carp without growth retardation.
From Here
viking link
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #81
Some interesting reading in your last posts
Agree about the nut baits, something different
Deffo agree about the L030, something else at the time
And as for sweetness, one of the best, carp love sweet things, I learned this quite a while ago now from a pal who was a matchman. Three words - Hitchens wonder paste. A guy started to use a home made paste at Hayfield lakes, Rob Hitchens, he absolutely battered my mate and all the top match lads week in and week out, took all the money, to the point they all complained and wanted him banning lol, bags of fish
It was finally accepted though when they started to market it so everybody could use it. I was most definitely interested, admit ably he was doing bags and bags of smaller carp but carp are carp to an extent. The short of it is, got the paste mix, pellets and powder, tasted it, just like pure sugar and the powdered additive was just like...icing sugar, and all the ingredients came from his kitchen cupboard, the rest is history as they say
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #81
Ok I can see some common ground there but let's go back to basics. Carp eat small fry and larger fish naturally. Isn't that a simple basic step to understanding what carp want to eat? Why do pellet companies use fishmeal not nutmeal when they could save shed loads of dollar using nut. They studied what makes fish eat more and grow faster......fishmeal! We are so lucky as anglers as we have so many things at our disposal to trick a carp into swallowing our rig. Even plastic hookbaits get a response but they wouldn't keep eating bits of plastic cos they know it offers nothing and is inedible. I guess what I'm trying to say is we have a basic formula which we know every carp in the world will pick up and eat more than once, it likes eating, it benefits from and it can be manipulated into so many different forms to keep on catching carp I.e fishmeal. You have to admit that it has been the one constant in carp fishing that has tripped up more carp than anything else. Make it digestible and you have a winner in cold water. If you could make it wriggle you would be top rod every year!! I'm not anti nut at all and an active nut with soluble ingredients has a place. One last note, if you think manky boilie is sitting around uneaten on lots of lakes round the country then you should see the amount of particles and maggots they found at linear when they had issues. At least a boilie normally floats off if not consumed.
I'm on one of the best well known boilie waters in the uk fished by a very broad band of anglers of all abilities and by my calculations the fishmeals and hnv bait have outfished all others by a huge margin.....is that a coincidence? Also they have accounted for the biggest carp of the year, and it was the same last year! It's these facts I find hard to ignore
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #80
Not just fashion mate. You are totally underestimating the reason for that sales change. Look at this way, how many clubs were there and syndicate waters around the country that had banned nuts ten years ago? The answer, tons. So, nut based boiled baits then become popular for certain reasons. A whole generation of carp, whom had barely ever seen a nut on these waters (but remember they love them). Give those anglers a nut based boiled bait which they are allowed to use on that venue, bosh. That is the reason right there. You're right, the balance will and already is being addressed. But that's the reason right there. It's nothing to do with a nice smell lol. Joe bloggs goes fishing to his local lake. He don't care, he just wants to catch a few fish. He no great angler, he just enjoys fishing. Suddenly he tries this nut bait, instead of his normal, because everyone is suddenly banging on about them. Suddenly, Joe Bloggs catches twelve that weekend, instead of none. The real reason that just happened, nuts are banned on Joe's lake. The carp throw their guard right down and want to scoff every last one. Ban fish meal from half the lakes in the country. Give it ten years, and let me come along with a way around it, to use a more dissolvable version of fish meal that's been banned. What do you think would happen? Exactly the same thing. The fish love, what the fish love. We are the ones who put rules there.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #79
We have sold Geoff's bait for years yes, I think that's common knowledge!! We do our own stuff now (and are expanding further if that helps you to drop in and make another purchase 😂😂 and we work with a few different boffins from back in the day. Yes nut baits feature more in modern bait sales but do I rate them above fishmeals? No I don't! But I'm not everyone and also I have never been shown a nut bait that I think offers a better profile than what I use today. That won't stop me trying to make a nutty bait though either as I understand that the market dictates what we work on and I have ideas which I think can make nut/carb baits better but that's for another day. I honestly think nut baits are popular because they smell nice!! And that makes it an easy sell for companies across the board. Think cell/Manila......id love a quid for every kilo sold. Fashion will go round again, hi protein insect meals may be the next step for baitworld who knows. The best boilies I have ever used honestly have a reason why they catch more carp and one of the main reasons is that they are still around on the lakebed when mr carp comes along. We designed a perfect ball designed to miss out other species, stay in tact, offer better nutrition and attraction (attraction being very important) and to be able to throw a long way with a tube of plastic (carbon now). Forget sales, forget hype and forget media and think about what you could make given a list of ingredients. The holy grail of boilie does exist and it will outfish a maggot or a seed or a nut simply cos it's easier for us to use!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #78
Ah okay, so all that is rubbish then is it. Okay. Shall we put it another way then keeperboy? Does Geoff formulate your baits, or did he used too? Do you sell MC Nut as something else, under a different name? I came and brought a load of particles from you lot once if you're who I'm thinking. Was served by a lovely lady. Whatever, the ratio of nut baits, to fish meals you have sold over the past five years has dramatically changed.That's a fact. Eight years ago if you were selling bait, you would have barely have been selling any nut mix boilies, it was far more swerved towards fish meal. You get my point.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #55
Wrong on every single thing you just said.
Nut mc, Average seller
Malarkey has always been average seller
But your bait will be successful for only two reasons
One......your marketing is well funded and constant
Two.......you actually have a good bait that will work all year round and anglers results spread. I'm not trying to fall out with anyone I'm just trying to offer a few valid points as to what I think makes bait successful. Nuts have a place in angling but I think they are much more efficient when ground up, roasted, salted and turned into powder or meal and combined with other base ingredients. Of course I have used peanuts over the years and caught carp but nothing to convince me they are any better than sweet corn or hemp. We will see more nut boilies in the future simply because they are cheaper to make (in most cases) and sustainable but I think the other ingredients used alongside the Nut meals are more beneficial. True we ain't there to feed carp, but a free meal goes along way to catching them in my opinion
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #76
You're convinced I'm 'Mark' lol. I'd have already bet they are too Viking, your best catches like you say. Your getting it into the water in amounts that they can really hone in on, and thus get excited about. The more 'excited' you get a carp, the more you catch. What if I told you that there were ways of making that liquid that you love, even better. Even more effective than what it already is right now? It does not matter what the liquid is, or how effective it already is in its own right. You can actually change the way that liquid goes through the water itself, and make that same product, into an even more effective product. Liquid is fantastic, but by doing certain things to these amazing liquids, we can actually enhance them, and how and why they work under water. Some human made oils are rubbish. Put them in an oven for an hour on a low heat, it changes them. Changes the very structure of the oil itself. Changes how that oil works in water. Think of cars being able to run on cooking oil, only after it has been used though. It's a different beast too the original one once it's been cooked.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #74
Hi Mark
Sure, some will boil out but hardly everything. I have done a bit of research on that and used to add 7% of total boilie weight in hydrolysate to the dough to have an estimated 5% in the finished boilie. It was then clear to see the boilie was leaking liquid when in the water.
Obviously getting the pure liquid in the water will have a stronger effect. I have had access to tons of hydrolysate, (literally) and using ridiculous amounts like 0,5-1 litre per rod has given me some of my best catches.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #72
It's obvious, a unique style of posting.
I spend too long reading the internet 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #70
Who's Mark? I'm Paulie, a little bit overweight, because I have a very sweet tooth.
Hi Viking, yes I'd agree, anything containing liquidised proteins, or anything else to be fair that is 'liquid', are far better than powdered versions of the same things, in terms of attraction. They generally, don't get bound up with egg either if applied after boiling, as a lot already will be doing with those types of liquids. But in a waterborne environment, anything liquid will always be better than something which is powdered, and bound up with eggs and boiled. The solid mass we call food for them, we put all this expensive and fancy ingredients in, then lock them up with egg. We have to do this to get around the actual fact that we sit on the bank for a couple of days, and need a bait in the water for eight hours and more that will repel smaller fish. So we use boiled bait, we can still do that. But putting expensive attractors into a bait and boiling them up is a very silly thing indeed. Bait maker has some very expensive GLM extract. The very best stuff. It's so super attractive to all fish. He will stick that in with the base mix, add eggs, and lock the goodness up. It's so soluble, that boiling it, makes it boil away. Think about it. What the bait maker should be doing, is putting a dash in with the powders pre boiling. But then finding a way to get that GLM, into the bait in a liquid form in large quantities. Do this, you will see the full power of GLM and how it will attract fish, I'd hazard a guess most anglers reading this never have seen that power. It's all there, we just have chosen to do it in the wrong way. Why, because some book said so? Some scientist said so? Some bloke thirty years ago said so who caught some carp? Carp fishing gets so stuck in it's ways because of this. If you can step back, forget everything you were ever told that got regurgitated over and over so many times that it surely had to be true? In a lot of cases, it's actually not true, there are better ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #64
I was thinking the same actually! If so, very good angler, good writer too..... Same style of writing too..... . If so, hope you are doing OK and hunt down 'that' SSSI one 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #68
Hi Rob, I'm not interested in selling you anything at all mate. At 3am, I'll either be fishing, or tucked up in bed with a nice looking lady hopefully every single time. Sometimes I'll be alone, I'll have a little think of you Rob, or Tim maybe on X Factor lol.
I won't ever be on here ever at 3am, that one you can put your mortgage on. I'm not a 'fountain of knowledge', I'm no better than you. I just a have a set of skills. A very particular set of skills Rob. Skills that I have acquired over a whole lifetime of fishing. Skills that make me a nightmare for people who have meltdowns about fishing at 3am on here, or say silly things about my life time passion when I know different. x
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #61
Hi Mark,
I believe the success of LO30 was down to the usual suspects, peptides and free AAs. Not saying AAs are everything as I am sure it is not. That said, almost everything containing hydrolysed protein in some form seem to make the carp interested, with or without salt.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #67
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #63
Why the obsession with who I am?
Not an obsession on my part anyway, it's just that history tells us that whenever someone comes on here that's a 'fountain of knowledge' but won't let on who they are, they usually end up trying to sell us a heated blanket or have a massive toys out the pram meltdown at 3am one night, or both
so, just like to know what I'm dealing with 
My name's Rob BTW
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #65
Your posts are interesting, crack on!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #51
Hi N/W,
I see that tigers, 5% protein thing is a bone of contention and as I remember, on that thread, the issue was never resolved to my satisfaction also.
Given that carp readily eat both tigers and peanuts, I wonder what triggers their chemoreceptors?
These are the composition figures rounded up.
Lipids. Protein. Carbs. Sugar
Tigers. 25% 5% 45% 15%
Peanuts. 50% 25% 8% 1%
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #64
Who? Never heard of him  .
Wow, pm's and everything. Let's just talk about bait eh. I don't get a lot of free time, I won't be on this forum much because of that single fact. I came here to speak about bait making with you lot, nothing else. We share a passion you see. I have no clue who any of you's are. It does not matter who I am really either does it mate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #62
Oh Chuffy. I saw a video on here once of an X Factor audition. Is that who you're talking about? That was one of the single funniest things I've ever seen on the internet. I actually cried tears. No I'm not called Tim .
Why the obsession with who I am? Can't we just talk about bait?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #61
You're not Tim Richardson are you?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #59
Here's another way of thinking about it. On the enhancer thread, I mentioned about getting things into a boiled bait in 'free form'. There was a product, which came onto the market years ago, that you all loved as bait makers, including me. It was LO30. Now that product, was so damn successful, because one, it was full up too the brim with natural salt, and second, because anglers were in the main putting it onto their freezer baits as a soak. And bingo, you have a mega salty liquid fish, in your bait in free form. It's not bound up with eggs like the powder, you've not boiled the natural salts content away in the liquid by boiling it for two minutes. It sent fish crazy, like nothing before it some would say. Well if you understand what I'm saying, there are other things, that are even more successful at that, than LO30 ever was. Understanding that not boiling the liquids, and getting them into the bait in free form, is where it was really at, and a natural salt content, that was through the roof helps no end. Manmade chemicals that try to mimic what nature is already doing, are not the way forwards in most cases. But, and again it's a big but, there are certain man made things, that have not only captured this, but have increased it.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #59
Because they are in nigh on every single product in there anyway mate. Maybe not the processed salt and sugar that we are thinking about as humans. Any fish meal product that we use and find successful, comes from salty sea fish. Fish meals which are not so salty, are not as good. Any bird seed, nut etc etc, contains oils, and sugars. Natural ones. I've seen it said on here plenty in the past that oils don't work at attracting carp. One second mate, while I roll around on the floor laughing for ten minutes again. That's better. Where were we, ah yes mate, all of the ingredients will have natural salts and sugars in them. The ones which have more, work better at attracting carp.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #58
Why does salt and sugar not significantly appear in the list of ingredients in commercial fish feeds?
These feeds, and the success of the companies which manufacture them throughout the world, depend on the fish eating them and digesting them.
Very interesting thread this one.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #57
It's fun though NemesisWitch, but I do get your point. I only replied to what you wrote regarding tigers and boiling. What you need too do mate, is not get defensive, but take in what I wrote. No one will probably ever tell you anything more important than that for free. I've read your posts a lot in the past mate, I agree with a hell of a lot of what you write, but some other bits, not so much. That's what it's all about though. Clueless people, have started successful bait companies off the back of what I'm talking to you about now, so take it in. They have to be boiled, even in bait production. But the less you can get away with boiling them, the better, trust me.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #56
So we are agreeing then Paul, so no need to be so bullish to everyone!
Hence my comment ref icing sugars and solubility... It wasn't that cryptic.
Tuber.... Energy source..... Carbs/sugars.... Etc.
I'm interested in why you do not think boiling 'improves' them.... Or is your focus on finely ground nut/increased surface area concept within a paste/boiled bait.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #54
Because they are natural and come from the ground Nemesis Witch. Mother nature knows better than any carp bait expert. They work on sugars. Every living creature on the planet depends on salts and sugars of some kind to survive. Understanding this fact, opens up your mind a bit.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #53
You sell Geoffs bagged up bait right Keeperboy? Let me hazard a guess, the MC nut or whatever you's lot call it is your best selling bait right? It's also your biggest catcher right? Five years ago if you were in business then, it was Malarky right?
Now read your post again regarding peanuts and tigers. Wow.
No a protein content of a bait is not a deterrent for FEEDING them, yes it is a deterrent to actually catching as many as you could whilst you're actually fishing. Reality, most over fished lakes now have high protein stodginess sitting on the bottom, at most times of year. Then anglers wonder why no ones catching when the lake is black with fish, you can walk across their backs nigh on. But no ones catching anything, because every sod is putting out kgs and feeding them, not actually catching them. You misunderstood my post, there is nothing about a well rounded freezer bait that they love to eat, that can not be bettered in terms of a rig, and actually catching them. There are certain things Keeperboy, that they do not try to actually eat. They suck and blow these items, and will take them into their mouth over and over again. Excitement in them, can override the danger signal, the one which which makes them leave a rejected rig. So you have two rigs on the same spot next to each other. On one rod you have the same hook bait as your super dooper loose feed. On the other you have something else. All around there are your super dooper loose feed baits. The rig with your bait on, it will get rejected once, and left alone. The other rig, will not be taken into their mouths in the same way. They will not try to eat that one as such, they will suck and blow it repeatedly. I don't need to tell you, the one which goes into and out of their gob ten times, is the one you get the bite on every single time. Their stomach is not the very best way to trick and catch them, their attraction receptors are. I hope you understand that better. No ones saying your great food bait, ain't great. But understanding what I just said, one will out fish the other 10-1 and it's not the food option.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #52
I think you've missed the irony in my post Paul.....
However, I'll pose you a question if I may.... Why do you think tiger nuts are so successful?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #50
I have kept carp for 30 years and the two things I have seen them repeatedly leave until last is peanuts and tigers! Last winter I threw in the remains of my bait from a session on another lake combined with my mates left overs. In that bucket was hemp, pellets, crushed boilie, tigers and peanuts. The carp went mad for it and when the water cleared I could clearly see peanuts and tigers left behind. Now the following morning they were gone. I have since seen this happen on two more occasions. Hemp and pellet always goes, boilies always go, tigers and peanuts always go but often after the other things have been consumed. I will always argue a nut doesn't offer much attraction compared to a pellet or boilie but I have no doubt they do eat them. Also in all my years I have never had a carp on a tiger in winter (I have seen them eat them but not with any conviction) as I feel there are better things to use like a maggot, or pva bag of liquid. Seeing as this thread is about digestion and boilies, comparing maggots or nuts is of little use. I think we have been trying to discuss what makes a boilie more useable in cold winter rather than betting on what will give you a bite first! Maggots are banned on my winter waters, nuts produce very little to all the members who tried, and boilies make up 98 percent of all captures at the main lake (fish to 59lb). All of my fish have come to boilies, granted a fluro has accounted for a few, but your statement comes across like the protein content of bait is a deterrent. I'm sorry I don't believe that at all. As stated before. A bait needs to work on many levels and having fishmeal in any bait I have used has landed all the big carp I have ever fished for. Why does mike Willmot not make nut baits? One last thing you just said Paulie, getting carp onto your bait is not important!!! **** me you have just tried to undo the words of nearly every decent angler I know. Free meal, more visits, more visits, more chances. Hold the fish in your peg more chances.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #51
Oh dear Nemisis Witch, you really actually believe that tiger nuts are made better in some way by being boiled? No I did not answer my own question. No they are not as good once you boil them. Maybe too take down the lake as whole nuts yes or you'd go carp killing. Not regarding bait production though. You are very, very wrong indeed. I thought you was a bit of a bait expert mate? Maybe sometimes you should open up your ears just a bit. You might just learn something other than the standard ABC blah blah blah. You and your scientist based friends on here, are pretty naive really when it comes to these things. Your comment, just proves this. You think you're being rather clever with their AA content. Really you're exposing that you don't really know that much in reality, about what really turns a carp on or carp bait production. Yes they have to be prepared to be used as whole nuts. No you're very wrong, they DO get denatured by boiling. Just not what you are referring too.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #50
I think you've already answered your own statement ref tiger nuts with your other comments about solubility and icing sugar. There are some though that believe tigers attract by their AA content of 5%, which of course are not denatured at all by boiling for an hour or so...
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #49
Improving digestabilibty is massive in terms of free bait. The more of anything you can get them to eat and pooh out, the more chance you will have of catching them, simple. But, and it's a massive but. Carp fishing is not about feeding them well, it's about catching them. The very successful anglers all know this very simple fact. A bait maker will always tell you, that you have to get them onto your bait. You don't, not really, not for the very best results anyway. You see, if you have 'something', that they are not the most interested in actually eating, but will take into and out of their mouth again and again, over and over. Then you will have 'something', which will produce FAR more bites than the most digestible, soluble, delicious, boilie that was ever invented/produced. How ever much they like actually eating it. It's not about feeding them, it's all about catching them whilst you're actually fishing. If you want to be the good Samaritan, who falls for a bait companies blurb, or a famous anglers sales pitch and the 'done' thing, you probably feel better because you feed them so well while you're actually fishing. Well done you, you're a very noble person indeed. You don't catch a fraction of the fish that you could though. Because you're blinkered. 99% of carp anglers are blinkered. When your eyes open clearly, it's all very simple indeed. There are certain things that make them take your bait into and out of their mouths as I describe. It's not a boilie free bait that they really enjoy eating either. Attraction and food, should be thought of as completely separate things. For those reading who do not understand the mechanics of carp feeding on our bait, anything they will take into their mouth over and over, gets around the age old problem of carp 'getting away with it'. If they get away with it once on your rig when they try to eat it, you're not catching it on your super dooper food bait on that rod, however much they love too eat it. It's been marked as dangerous. But 'something' which actually overrides this danger signal, that they will take into their mouths over and over, four, five, six times, sucking and blowing to test it. They are not trying to 'eat' it as such. They get caught. It's a pretty simple thing, they are pretty simple/curious creatures. I choose too feed them really well, I'd wager better than anyone on this thread. But never when I'm actually fishing. Fishing for them, is just that, I want too catch them. Feeding them, is for when I'm not actually fishing.These two things do not marry up as to what 99% of carp anglers believe and practice with boilie fishing. High protein baits are not the way forwards at all. Fish meals work far better when broken right down with other ingredients, as already mentioned on this thread. The reason, because you're reducing the protein/stodgy level. Like us, they find things which are not actually the best for them, very very attractive indeed funnily enough. Nuts are so bad for them right? Terrible protein levels, blah blah blah. Must be real because the scientists tell you this? Speak to a real top angler, the very best. If they really drop their guard with you, he'll tell you that there's no boiled free bait ever been made, that is more attractive to a carp than a tiger or peanut. If he don't, he's not the carp angler that you think he is, or he's lying. So go figure. The moment nuts were broken down into nut based boiled baits, the nut was broken down into a more soluble form. One which could be processed by them far easier than a full nut. They love nuts, yes they should never be fed to them in quantities whole. But protein and scientist talk, does not change the fact that in reality, carp absolutely love nuts. It's another one of those anomalies, that does not match up to what we are told by science. I go with reality every time myself.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #48
I'm not replying to anyone in particular here, just the rather confusing thread I just read. Brocacell aids digestion. If they can pooh it out faster, they can eat more. They are very simple creatures. I've seen one very big UK carp, devour nearly it's own body weight in sweetcorn in two hours. That big carp got caught. We understand so little about how much they really eat. If it's something which they can digest easily, they can pooh it out, as fast as they can eat it. Boilies don't fall into this category. Making them digestible really helps. Fish meals working well in winter??? Well if you mean you will still catch on them, you will, they eat their own crap. But if some one has a decent winter bait next to you, you'll catch nothing at all, he will. What a bait maker says to keep you buying their fish meal bait in the winter, is one thing, reality is another. That's often the way too. Leads to lots of ******** being spoken. Fish meals are superb, but in the winter? Wake up. As for gourmet carp food which is full up with protein, it's just not the way forwards in any way shape or form. Anyone who ploughs this furrow, has no clue about real life carp fishing. I see this stuff written over and over again. You want to catch them, lots of them, not fill them all up with five baits. Any of you bait buffs with your high protein theories, or fish meals in the winter theories, want to put your money where your mouth is. I'll have a ten grand bet with any of you. You can come to a runs venue, in winter with your fishmeal, or warmer climes with your high protein wonder baits. For the fish meal in winter believers, I'll bring just 60 of my baits with me. I may well catch on every single bait I bring. It will not be a fish meal. For the high protein gourmet bait lovers, I'll bring a bag of KP peanuts and a very small bucket of hemp. I'll out fish both of you's, by a long long way. So I'm happy to have a ten grand bet with any of you. Up for it? I doubt you will be. If you do, you're very silly indeed and you are going to lose ten grand. That's not being aggressive or argumentative. That's just trying to prove a small point of how silly some things being said here actually are in real life, away from the internet.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #47
Hi GB,
It seems if quality lipids and carbs are included in feed at the optimum levels: 10 to 15% for lipids and 40 to 45% for carbs, then digestion and utilisation is not an issue.
Protein utilisation is the issue because of limiting essential AAs.
Christian mentioned that some birdfeed makers include extra lysine and methionine. Why is that?
Because they will be the 1st and 2nd limiting AAs. They are balancing the protein so it can be fully utilised.
Fish and animal feed makers all do the same to balance their protein sources.
I think your initial question has been answered.
Whether a home bait maker wants to address FLAA or not is, of course, a separate issue.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #46
Food for thought folks! Thanks again for all the replies!
Please can someone address carbohydrate and fat digestion if possible.
Kind regards,
Gaius
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #42
It is worth remembering that carp, like most species, have evolved over a very long period of time to survive and flourish on what is naturally available to them,hence this will be a 'balanced' diet for them. Nature always does best.. Whether we try to mimic this balance and provide additional nourishment (therefore boosting fish feeding confidence), or create a bait that offers a good chance of getting a bite perhaps even when the fish may not really be feeding, all our offerings are superflous..
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #44
Trust me to fish a lake full of sceptics.....
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #43
The carp spitting and re-collecting is probably due to palatability, the more palatable the faster they get swallowed.
I have done a lot of tank testing together with a scientist and it is really helpful.
Its amazing how quick they learn to what is palatable and what is not. It is also very interesting to see how the fish has different personalities (in lack of a better word) and how some fish optimistically pick up everything offered and others seem to be natural born sceptics.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #42
I work with a very well known fish producer and we are going to conduct some tests this winter. To see how certain baits work in the cold and also to see if the carp get bigger on the same weight of hnv boilie compared to the normal feed and any side effects. We have already made some interesting notes. Certain baits the fish collect, move round and spit out before repeating the process and then finally swallowing. A recent nut/milk protein we are working on was taken and swallowed immediately every time by every fish. That always gets the grey matter working. I think we can all learn so much if you have actual carp to watch and make better judgement of how they process bait. Like I said on another thread, if you glug baits in hydrolysed fish liquids just watch the carps reaction!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #37
BB
Still don't think the theory stands up to the fact that carp binge on what is available be that natural food or our various baits and do very well indeed. Probably because overall they get a balanced diet, I don't think giving them this balance in my bait alone is required at all hence the important ingredients in my baits are chosen for attraction and taste, during the summer especially these will include proteins from different sources and hydroslates and fermented products.
In the winter I change the mix as I believe carp will eat more individual boilies if they contain less protein but I still add fermented products and some pre digested liquids and a few other ingredients I suspect attract in winter such as sugar.
Must say though that the comments on this thread are very thought provoking, it's good that we have differing opinions often because we all have different experiences and often different goals.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #39
Hi Christian,
As carp is one of the most common farm fish in the world there is plenty of information out there. I can put up some links later but Google will get you plenty of information.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #38
Hi Keeperboy,
I'm guessing that your HNV mix which I assume you were referring to in your previous post, comes close to, or actually addresses FLAA.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #35
Viking, thanks for putting that up, so there is information on how well carp can digest protein from different sources, suppose I shouldn't really be surprised. From a personal point of view it would be interesting to know the figures for protein digestion from whey, casein, brewers yeast and liver as these are the ones I use the most.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #36
The whole fishmeal/protein saga does run through my mind but last winter I gave it a proper go, I gave up on my simple (cheaper) boilie which has always worked and decided to go for it with my hnv mix but only in old fashioned quantities (1-2kg) and to be fair it worked well. I got takes on bottom baits and matching wafters (not hi viz fruity pop ups like most folk do, that's not a fair test of your bait in my opinion) and that really boosted my confidence. The lads who I have given it to also faired well between November to March and all used very small quantities. The point I'm trying to get at is that the bait I use is very complex compared to many baits and even though it has fishmeal and a higher protein content, the carp still looked for it and consumed it regularly. I have no doubt they ate various other baits during this time. In the last 15-18 years I have used two baits that were bloody awesome in warm weather but totally useless in the winter. One of them hasn't been made for ages and the other has a winterised version now as the company must have also realised the boilie Wasn't as efficient in cold weather. So many variables in bait but I think a fishmeal can and will work all winter but only when it's well balanced with soluble milks/birds and salts and vitamins.
Just my opinion and I could be way off!
I also think that attraction is far more important in winter than in summer. A bait with the all the best ingredients may be totally useless if it's not giving out any leakage or attraction in the first place.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #34
Hi Christian,
I think the most important thing about FLAA is that if that AA is really deficient, then most of the protein will be unusable, which does the fish little good or the water quality. Low protein baits, as you suggest in winter will probably have the same problem. Little of it might be assimilated.
In 1kg of mix with 30% main protein, it requires a high quality protein and extra supplementation to get close to addressing FLAA.
Re digestion, I'm not sure the carp's ability to digest protein is temp dependant, but the rate of digestion probably is.
Mind you, it's not that straightforward, because if the mix contains a fair amount of hydrolysates which are included in the calculation, then once in the lake, the hydro's will release aminos far quicker than the rest of the protein and might render it unbalanced. As I was told, a mix of processed proteins put in a lake will be subject to a range of variables that would make the release of aminos impossible to predict.
Nevertheless, I believe giving the carp a protein source close to their requirement is the best bet.
I also think it is the best way to try and produce the most effective feed signal.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #29
Cannot argue with the bait make up you describe, I have and still do use similar quality mixes. Cost is not an issue for me, I want a bait I am confident will catch the fish I'm after.
However I still would not use such a mix in the colder seasons preferring a much lower protein content and no fishmeal.
Interesting comment re lysine, as I notice that a lot of egg food based birdfood ingredients have added lysine and methionine.
|
|
|
|
This message has been suppressed by a moderator.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #31
BB
I've had a look at your previous post but still not convinced, a product with a stated % susceptibility does not mean that a carp can access all the nutrition, I thought it meant that at best it can be digested to that %.
So a carp might get a proportion of the % digestibity while for instance a carnivore such as a pike could in the case of a fish meal could get more. As cold blooded creatures the amount would be dependant on the temperature of the water which would effect the rate of metabolism. A warm blooded mammal with a more efficient digestive tract would get even more.
This is why I believe the FLAA theory does not stand up, the carp's ability to digest protein is temperature dependant, and the digestability of each protein source (eg fish, soya, yeast, etc) is also different and I doubt that this can be determined accurately.
Give them a decent amount of protein in the summer and we are doing the best we can. It has certainly worked very well for me without ever having to worry about FLAAs
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #28
Thanks for the replies folks! I never knew the subject of digestability was sooo complicated!
The digestibility of the oils and carbohydrates surely has to be taken into account in the overall digestibility.
I posed a similar question too christian.
Seems to me that just focusing on the protein side of things is only a part of the whole picture.
I also wonder how quickly a Carp can tell that a food source is readily digestible and will preference a bait over a natural food source it is regularly consuming.
From what I've read and heard, it's tough to get fish eating bait if there is an abundance of natural food in a lake on offer.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
Hi Gaius,
"given their simple digestive system."
There are some great posts on this thread in answer to your initial question which makes very interesting reading.
My thoughts are that no matter how digestible you make a bait you will never be able to overcome the fact that carp have a "basic" digestible system that's incapable of processing the highest HNV baits.
Why they seek them out is for another thread.....
Best
Jon
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #28
Hi Christian,
Please read my post no 12.
In your previous post, you based some of your points on the fact that commercial baits catch most of the fish.
But considering that probably 95% of anglers use them, it's hardly a fair comparison to use as to their effectiveness.
BB.
|
|
|
|
This message has been suppressed by a moderator.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #28
A good mix of a quality lt fishmeal, soluble quality milk protein, active yeast, some good attractors and a lysine rich liquid combined with a good flavour combo has been catching me carp for about 30 years now. Trouble is this mix costs a fair dollar these days and Therein lies the problem.......it ain't 5 quid a kilo anymore!!
If in doubt try a maggot
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #27
Somebody is going to have to please explain to me the link between FLAA and digestibility as I don't get it, most of the AA's in our baits are in the form off the original protein or in peptides in pre-digested ingredients. How easy these are broken down I can understand as how digestible a bait might be. But even this only addresses the digestibility of the protein which might only account for 30-40% of the best baits. The digestibility of the oils and carbohydrates surely has to be taken into account in the overall digestibility.
And, as I stated previously in winter the carp's metabolism will be much slower than in the summer so the breakdown of the bait will be slower. This is why we use less bait in winter, but its not beyond possibility that we could use more if we reduced the nutritional ingredients of our baits and reduce the strain on the carps digestive tract.
|
|
|
|
FLAA is not about fish attraction. You can make a bait that is very digestible and have high attraction..
A well balanced bait, with attention given to the details such as FLAA and vitamin and mineral content, will be good for the carp. A healthy carp will grow more and feed more often so you have a better chance of catching a bigger fish. You also have the knowledge that you are doing everything you can to look after the carp.
Undigested bait will lead to poor water quality but a balanced bait will benefit the fish and the fishing
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #24
ABS have been telling their customers not to change off the hydra k for winter, I know that, and that backs up this argment nicely. Definitely a nicely put together bait that.
|
|
|
|
I would like to add my view regarding both FLAA and winter baits....
With regards to FLAA the theory is interesting but I have ignored it, as I would suggest have most commercial bait companies and there have been probably millions of carp caught on their baits plus the odd one or two on my own. It is quite possible to formulate a very attractive and nutritious bait with out considering it. Carp binge on what is available be that snails, bloodworm, etc without a single thought on whether they provide a full amino profile, and they treat our baits exactly the same.
It's all very good in a laboratory but in the real world the carp do not eat a single foodstuff and there will be so many different varieties of boilie eaten how could we possibly know which is the limiting amino acid.
With regards to winter baits, I think this relates to the original post, as cold water creatures the carp's metabolism will be different (slower?) in the winter so why shouldn't a different bait type be better at this time of year. They probably can't digest food as well as in the summer so baits that pass through them easily in the summer might not in the winter.
Most birdfood baits and even nut baits, commercially available are generally low in protein and there can be no denying that it is these types of bait have historically been the most successful winter baits, eg nutabaits enervite, Nash amber attract and of course mainlines cell.
I need to make sure I have as much as possible in my favour especially in the winter and my advice is don't take a chance come up with a birdfood bait relatively low in protein and if you must use fishmeal stick to the predigested variety as they are far more soluble.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #23
Yep, no coincidence that I use that mix (or a slight variation on it) for both summer and winter. Of course I catch less in winter due to the decreased metabolism of the carp in cold water but it has never crossed my mind to alter the bait's composition for summer/winter use. I get that people do like to change but also like to point out that their reason for doing so is flawed.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #22
Hi CC,
On the B/F, Pete B listed his standard mix, which has a fishmeal main protein and which many of the members used. He was asked whether he would change anything for winter fishing, and he replied no, and that the bait would work just as well in cold water.
BB.
|
|
|
|
Interesting thread with good contributions and no mud slinging!
In terms of bait for cold water it is often touted that we should drop fishmeals etc due to oil content and go to a nut bait for example with milk powder etc.
Due to poor digestion of oil in cold temps this has always been contradictory when you consider that the sack of Provimi I was looking at yesterday had an oil content of 6.8% whereas the milk powder next to it was 22% and nuts would certainly be higher than that. In my experience a well balanced fishmeal which covers FLAA and is not too high in oil will produce more than the accepted winter baits do. Anyone else have this experience?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #20
Hi razorback,
Thanks for the appreciation.
I'll try and word it better.
I've been led to believe that a highly attractive bait can be made that doesn't fulfill the full nutrition requirement and addresses FLAA.
Although, I would try and do both, because I don't like the thought of the protein not being fully utilised.
Off to bed now to get some zeds.
Night night,
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #19
Thanks for your contribution..👍👍
I have been led to believe that a highly attractive bait can be not the most nutritious
.....and the negative in that is?? From an alternative perspective.. 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #18
Hi razorback,
Attraction is somewhat of a separate issue and I have been led to believe that a highly attractive bait can be not the most nutritious.
However, on this thread, I have tried to answer the questions asked on nutrition.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #17
Hi BB
I am not talking about a mix that locks them up. I am talking about a mix which has reasonable nutrition but goes straight through them
It might also be one that they like eating too.
Any unused bait still contain nutrients they can't use would have wider benefit also.. non?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #15
Hi razorback,
I actually think the opposite is the case.
Giving them a nutritionally balanced bait that is easily digested will do them good, give them energy and soon pass through them and get them looking for more.
I think it is the poorly constructed, unbalanced bail that sticks in their craw that leads them to sit in snags for days trying to digest it.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #14
Hi GB,
I presume it means it is 94% digestible period, whatever eats it.
BB.
|
|
|
|
May I offer an alternative...
We are trying to catch them, not give them a complete food source to satisfy them wholly. At best we can only supplement their diet, as nature has it covered with evolution in most cases.
If they are shatting bait out I would see it as a sign they
A - like the bait
B - enjoy eating it
C - I have a chance of catching one.
Not filling them up so they sit in snags for days totally 'nutritionally complete'
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #12
Thanks for the replies folks!
BB when you say LT94 is 94% digestible is that, period, or just as a Carp digests it?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #12
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #7
Hi GB,
In say, 1 kg of feed, carp will require a set number of gms of each of the 10 essential AAs to synthesize the protein. If one is less than the requirement, that is the FLAA and when that is used up, the synthesis stops and the rest of the protein becomes unusable. If an FLAA is seriously depleted, it can mean only a small percentage of the protein is usable.
The digestibility of quality proteins is given in their nutritional profile, e.g. LT94 is stated as 94% digestible.
Carp use lipids as an energy source and carbs too to certain extent. Carp, apparently have an efficient digestive system to assimilate carbs.
I wouldn't think bait density, egg shells and grit would have any influence on digestion.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #10
FLAA is about nutrition, not attraction, and nothing to do with AA's that carp can't produce themselves. I don't think there is any evidence of carp searching out for specific AA's.
It's as BB said correctly earlier.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #7
FLAA stands for first limiting amino acids. They are Aminos acids that the carp cannot produce themselves and the belief is that they instinctively search them out. The amino acids that fall into this group are Methionine and Tryptophan.
To cover FLAA, the amino profile of each of the ingredients has to to be studied to see if the said amino acids are present.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #2
Thanks for those links Neil no Fish (surely not!). I shall peruse with much interest
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #4
Yes, I noted that he didn't mention what sort of base mix he was referring to in his comments - hence my querie relating to the popular base mix types. That's why I posted on here to get more understanding of how this actually works in practice.
High BB35 Please kindly explain FLAA's to me. I had a quick google, (as one does) Wikipedia it and I'm assuming the L is levartory ( lefthanded protiens ) but after that it's way too complicated for me to understand! So if you could kindly put it in layman's terms ish or refer me to some gentle reading about It I would be grateful. Tim Paisley's chapter called Heavy chemistry in Carp! Has been a good starting point for me. What makes a high quality protein digestible, is it the ease at which it can be broken down into its components? How can I tell?
what about fats and carbohydrates in terms of carp digestion?
Does the density of the bait make a difference? I have heard that more “open” mixes make a difference to digestability...
What about egg shells and oyster grit? I seem to remember that it was popular to add these to a base mix too at one stage?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #5
Why would a meat tenderiser include a carb Enzyme? Do you know what you are talking about or guessing? They often contain a tiny percentage of papain (of unknown strength) and are completely and utterly useless for bait making.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
I believe some meat tenderisers contain amylase which help with digestibility 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
Utter rubbish by FW... Without knowing the whole mix, you can't address FLAA, and without that you won't have a clue about digestibility. Which is pretty much what BB had said in a more polite manner.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
Hi GB,
Choose good quality proteins with high digestibility to match carp nutritional requirement and address FLAA.
Limiting AAs greatly reduce the utilisation of the protein.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
here are a few links that will give food for thought.
https://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/42449/fishing/homemade_carp_bait_secrets_and_bait_attractors.html
https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0007114554000372
|
|
|
|
Hi folks!
I was wondering how to improve the digestive properties of bait for carp, given their simple digestive system.
I was interested in a comment by Frank Warwick that adding brocacel improves a bait from 15% to 60% digestable by using 3% per volume.
I wondered what else can be used?
I'm thinking about boilies here (all types, 50/50, milk proteins, fish meal, and bird food etc)
Your thoughts please!
|
|
