|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #205
8g of any of the milk 'palatants' is a bit high. I'd look at halving that.
Also have a look at the Orlux bird foods, they're better quality than the Haiths ones in my view.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #205
maple cream or condensed milk flavor would go nice with that.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #204
So Bristol something even simpler like this?
500g Red Factor/CLO Mix
100g Acid Casein
100g Rennet Casein
100g Calcium Casinate
100g WPC
50g Yeast
50g Wheatgerm
8g Milk E
No idea on flavour
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #203
Indeed, that would be a great bait. Nectarblend/ Red Factor?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #201
I know a few folks who use this 50/50 with a bird food ingredient to make it easier on the wallet.
They do well on it.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #201
150 g rennet casein
150 g acid casein
100 g whey protein
100 g lactalbumin
100 g egg albumin
100 g soya isolate
100 g calcium caseinate
100 g whole egg powder
100 g wholemeal semolina
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #199
Now that the colder months are setting in this might be a good idea. Be interested to hear the buffs opinions on such a mix.
JB's Supermilk is now £22/kg 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #198
Maybe in need of a carpforum approved milk based recipe..........:D
|
|
|
|
Sorry to drag up an old thread.......was there ever a unanimous decision on a milk basemix?have read through this but there’s a few different recipes. I want to try something different, regardless of the cost. Everyone on my syndicate uses fishmeal or a nut based bait. As do I. Thinking I’d like to try to use a high quality milk bait that I can roll myself and see if it brings any different results.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #178
Have reposted in the Peter Boughton UCN Developments thread
|
|
|
|
Hope Pete B is doing ok.
Had some communications with him over another forum over 15 years ago. He gave me a recipe and some good honest guidence on bait. It transformed my fishing overnight.
Top bloke.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #194
Hello Mr
I hope those hookers are going well for you. Keep up the good work sir. Dave, speak soon mate.
|
|
|
|
|
Good luck Dean. Send Pete my regards. I hope he is back on the bank soon.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #191
Hi dean how are you doing? I will give you a call tomorrow send pete my wishes
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #191
Have a good weekend too mate. Speak soon.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #190
Will send your regards and well wishes John and keep you all posted.
Have a great weekend.
Dean
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #178
Hi Dean
Hope you are getting out and having a few!
Please give my very best wishes to Pete. Also please keep me in the loop regarding UCN developments, etc.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #186
Hi Dean,
Yes, I would be grateful if you keep me up to date with the progress of UCN Developments LTD.
As well as Ultimate E, I presume you're planning a new enzyme bait as well.
If so, I look forward to ordering some.
Viking and I communicate by Email, and if you might wish to message me privately, my Gmail address is listed on my profile.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #181
Hi Dean,
Long time, good to see you on here. Glad to see that that UCN is on the roll again.
The project with BB is progressing well, no boiling simplifies things.
Best regards to Pete, and wish him a speedy recovery.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #178
dont know him but best wishes and speedy recovery to peteb
best of luck with the relaunch of UCN - it certainly lit a rocket under forum bait discussions back then !
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #183
Hi BB
I will keep you up to speed. The company has been formed UCN Developments LTD. So all moving forward nicely. Apologies to those that anticipated the re launch a little while back. It is all about timing and this time around it's 100% for real.
Good luck to you both BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #182
And you have the recipe for success and recovery right there my friend. He has quit the fags and now has a vape. I desperately want to get him to the 50th BCSG celebrations in a few weeks. I think he would like to get there. Peter is a very determined individual when he puts his mind to something so lets keep our fingers crossed
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #179
his brain is intact
You mean they've finally fixed it? 
Thanks for letting us know Scaley - best wishes for a speedy recovery Pete B.
EDIT:
Sorry Dean - didn't spot that scaley&dark was quoting your post!
Thank YOU for letting us know - please pass on my best.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #181
Hi Dean,
Good to speak to you again.
Please give my best wishes to Pete for a speedy recovery and that he will soon be sitting behind his rods again.
Yes, Viking and I are enjoying the challenge, but as you well know, it is advanced chemistry for laymen like us.
We are making progress with our trial and error, but find that actually testing the effectiveness of a mix is not an exact science and is difficult to evaluate.
Re the Ultimate E, perhaps you could keep us informed as to its possible re launch.
Regards,
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #180
Hi Dean, the recovery road for him will be frustrating at times, as you instinctively want to achieve full recovery ASAP, and do too much, too early. Just Human nature.
Like carp fishing patience is needed, an end result after lots of short sessions.
So, yes with time, warming up, increased circulation & stretching, and gradually exercise the physios will work their magic.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #180
For BB and Viking
I hope your enzyme route is going well and you are enjoying the chase and challenges. Duncan and Mr Woods,hello to you 2 boys. I believe the Ultimate "E"is being re launched. Dave, could you give me a call please as I have lost your number.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #179
Hi scaley
He is doing well sir. His movement has been compromised, mainly, his right side but gradually with physio, it is coming back.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #178
Peter Boughton BCSG member has just had quite a large stroke and is rehabilitating in hospital. It will be a long road to recovery, of that I am sure, his brain is intact and his speech.
I wish Pete a full and speedy recovery Get back to health first mate.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #177
Hi
Given the pure fact that carp are THE pigs of the lake, they are the first to utilise an abundant food supply. You can dig and delve into a carps dietary requirements, receptors and amino acid profiles and end up with the possibility of disappearing up your own backside. Milk proteins were never in any of our baits at U.C.N for some of the very reasons mentioned in this thread, cost being a major implication and the fact that certain animal and vegetable proteins when used in the correct combination, are just as effective, if not more so. Enzymes in any shape or form, be it protease,(proteins)amylase (starch into sugar) or lipase( fats) are substances that catalyse the hydrolysis of each group, proteins, sugars and fats. Now there are some that I know, that have taken this the full 9 yards using all 3 groups to break down virtually everything within their baits and have had some amazing success and I tip my hat to these genius individuals for their sheer tenacity.
You see what most people tend to forget, is that enzymes are both temperature and ph specific. What that means in normal language is that each enzyme has an optimum effective working temperature and ph and different enzymes break down different bonds within lets say a protein. The key, is, if you are stupid enough like me,to attempt to try and roll commercially, is to get each enzyme to kick in at different stages of the rolling process, mixing, post boil and post freeze. |Now imagine if you will, just for a moment, in the heat of summer you are mixing within a temperature range where 2 of your chosen enzymes have similar working temps of around 22- 35 degrees. You are using eggs, the whites of which are pure albumen. What will the enzymes attack first? this is what binds/holds your mix together. Picture the scene of a compressor spitting out paste like a machine gun. The bonds within the egg whites are being broken down so the paste will not hold together...….so as you could imagine when you have a 200kg order to honour,lots of FCuks and trays of eggs being launched. Now to my point, Enzymes are, in my humble opinion, in the right hands, a massive edge, although no substitute for watercraft, common sense and application. Commercially back then in 2007, a veritable nightmare. Things have moved on in the 13 or so years since we first launched our baits. The process has not changed but the working environment needed to.
Peter Boughton BCSG member and outright argumentative barsteward knows his enzymes and is without question one of the leading brains within this field whether you like him or loathe him as I am sure some of you do and with, I would imagine good reason, has just had quite a large stroke and is rehabilitating in hospital. It will be a long road to recovery, of that I am sure, but since he has been there( his brain is intact and his speech) he now has a burning desire to take this subject to the next level. It could be very interesting. But on closing, I wish any of you who wish to take this route every ounce of success, you WILL need patience and diligence , but the end result really is something to behold when you get things right.
Enjoy the sunshine chaps
Dean
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #176
Hi KB,
I would imagine that those cheap baits must have contained something in excess which rendered them repellent, because, I asked MM a while ago about the attraction of very simple baits and the answer was that they can be capable of emitting a good feed signal, given a favourable construction, but that a good feed signal is far more likely when using the better ingredients.
I think, your carp ignoring particles to feed on the pellets and crushed boilies is evidence that they home in on the most stimulating feed signal.
Exactly the same scenario was described by users of the UCN enzyme bait, where in their case, the carp swam over top range, commercial boilies to mop up the enzyme. They then came back to eat the others.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #175
BB we perhaps take certain ingredients for granted these days and most good baits contain, digestive aids, yeasts, amino rich liquids etc but what must have been in the cheap baits that those carp literally wouldn’t eat!!!! The thing is, i saw a one ton pallet of those baits walk out of a show a few years back.....the customer feed back would have been an Interesting read 😂 my good friend is a fish breeder and we have talked about feeding two large tanks of his stockies with two different types of feed (maybe one pellet and one boilie) to see how they are affected or how they grow over the course of a month when fed the same amount of feed every day. He has noted that certain feed products are consumed then spat out, then consumed by others. He also said that when they see a new feed and that they consume it instantly and aggressively you know the feed has some mileage. Little things like this always spark my interest but I understand that hungry carp at a constant temperature in a facility isn’t always a fair test of natural Carp behaviour. I have witnessed my carp swimming over beds of tigers and showing little interest in cold water, and even leaving peanuts and maples behind whilst destroying the pellets and crushed boilies amongst it, only to go back a few hours later and eat everything. I have never ever seen those carp refuse pellets, or crushed boilie or a maggot!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #174
Hi KB,
I'm sure many of us envy your lake size, natural bait testing facility.
And it shouldn't go unnoticed to those who buy their bait that, what bait you supply commercially will have been thoroughly tested.
Re clogging carp up with boilies, that's one reason for home baitmakers to address FLAA in their mixes so all the protein can be utilised upon ingestion.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #173
Also I’m sure we can all remember the photos of Gary Bayes with his wheelbarrows of nashy overs being fed to his day ticket carp, he was putting in hundreds of kilos week in week out and he told me once that he never saw them bobbin up to the surface uneaten. You do not need much bait to catch a carp and I’m an advocate of small traps and singles (bear in mind I should be telling you all to fill it in 😂  but I spent a while at linear watching the water level rise with the amount of bait going in (not literally) and I have never seen a boilie floating on the surface yet
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #172
I have only ever seen my carp refuse boilies once in ten years and they were a sample of a very cheap euro boilie that they literally never ate (nor did the birds), some weeks they see 40k of mixed overs (even in winter) mixed with cereals and pellets and they eat it the lot. This idea of carp getting filled up and not being able to eat anymore I have not seen yet on this specific lake where the whole stock can be viewed every single day of the year. And there are no other species but carp. However on another lake in the 90s I saw a group of lads fish with huge amounts of red fishmeal boilies all through the winter and the lake completely switched off. At the time we blamed these lads for ruining it but looking back I’m not so sure. It would take an extreme amount of bait Fed to a very small group of carp to ruin their digestion in my opinion. And I have watched a 39lb mirror eat nearly 3kg of richworh ultraplex in half an hour. Eating machines......definitely, clogging them up with boilies, I can’t say that I have ever physically seen this happen yet. Let’s be honest here how many anglers ever get to fish a lake where you can see everything happening? Most lakes we have no idea what bait has gone, what’s left, what they picked out and what they left behind. The syndicate I’m on we all know for 100 percent certain and it’s why it’s the perfect place to design and test and film carp at the same time. Like I have said on here before. It answers most of the questions simply because it’s infront of your own eyes and not a guess
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #171
17.5kg of sweetcorn is incredible, lets have it right. Carp have capabilities, that we as anglers, or even scientists, do not even understand properly I'd say. A carp, is an eating machine. In nature, it is like this...
All fish are gorgers, without anglers bait, they are actually designed this way for nature. When nature gives them a food larder... It will be plentiful, and they need to capitalise on it. Try and get a bite when a blood worm bed is kicking off. No chance. They will smash it all. They have a switch inside their head, that mother nature put there. That switch, once flicked... They turn into an eating machine and nothing will stop them. Sweetcorn is like bloodworm, mainly water. They can crap it out, as soon as they eat it. Doing both actions at the same time, both as fast as each other. A carp can eat its own body weight in a few hours... Very shocking for all I presume. Only if the food being eaten, will pass straight through. Most boilies do not do this very well.
Carp are grazers like cows, that are built to handle big quantities of natural food at any point. They have a very simple gut, it's designed to get water borne food through it quickly. When we give them stodge, we inhibit this.
I wrote somewhere else on this forum when I first joined, about making your boiled bait filled with water, before it goes into the lake. Not 'washing out', filling them with a predetermined amount of water. This is why. It's more attractive to them, and you are actually helping them to eat it! When anglers think that carp are leaving bait for a couple of days.... Because they are clever... It's far more likely, that they just do not want another 'bellyache', by eating a load of rock hard balls!
It's all quite simple really.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #170
17.5 kilos of sweet corn is a huge amount of feed for a carp to eat, that Swirly must have been streaming it out
Is the simple fact, that filling a carp right up, so it does not want to eat anymore, is not conductive to catching them.
Or making more bait profit, LOL ! if anglers need to use LESS kilos of bait 
I like to look back at the 70 & 80’s milk protein trend and information from the likes of, Rod Hutchinson’s Protein Mix, Geoff Kemp’s Ultra & Protein mix, Nutrabaits Hi Nu Val, etc, all great baits.
But then Nutrabaits Enervite & Lockey came along with the Savay seed mixes, Cheap, low protein, high fibre content, loose textured, high vitamins and minerals.... surprisingly carp liked them and everyone’s outlook changed on bait.
Think everyone is trying to simulate the old Skool protein rich base mix, pumping out amino acids straight way and holding a degree of attractors back, but in a cheaper more digestible base mix utilising attractive protein rich hydroslate liquid.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #157
Bob, that post right there. Total sense that is.
We live in a world, where it's easier to copy something else, than to do it for yourselves. You cannot get stuck in your ways about bait, like the rest all do. Some times mad things work. I have the greatest respect for every single person on this thread. Even if we may not agree sometimes, at least every single one is trying stuff for themselves.
The bait industry mainly, is just one big copy cat. Fish meal, blah, blah, wonder bait. Rubbish.
One of the biggest understandings for a bait maker... Is the simple fact, that filling a carp right up, so it does not want to eat anymore, is not conductive to catching them. It's conductive to selling bait, but not always to catching them. The best, highest protein, amino acid laden, natural sugars filled, super boilie of all boilies... Is USELESS. If it fills them up, if it is to stodgy. This happens, and they do not feed as well as they can. Preoccupation is always king, when it comes to catching them. You need to 'make' them have it... And they will. They are eating machines, we should never get in the way of that with our 'offerings'.
This photo is a scan of a print, it's the Swirly common, from Milton Pan in Kent. It might be dead now. It is so long ago, I have hair (not ginger, it's the sun!) A Ted Baker flannel shirt on, and Nike Burt Bruins. Kids will not even know what Burt Bruins are I bet. 
This fish, was meant to be so hard to catch, they all were in that lake apparently. It had the reputation locally, as a real ball breaker lake. It was just up the road from the 'Brook', where the British record lived. The Brook was packed, Milton was empty back then. A far more natural lake, with natural carp. I caught this fish in the edge. I fed this fish, 17.5kg of frozen corn. Another fish ate a bit. But this fish, ate virtually the lot. Carp are very aggressive creatures, they will butt each other when they want the other, to know something of that nature. The biggest, or near biggest fish in a lake, is always king of the castle when it comes to food. This fish, was crapping that sweetcorn out, as fast as it could eat it, on a shallow bar in the edge. I made two trips to the supermarket, and bought them out of corn. I caught that fish though, rapidly to. Swirly was very greedy indeed with corn. It could go years without being caught though on boilies. Understanding things like this, lead to better bait making.
You can't fill them up with stodgy boiled bait. If you do, long periods without eating ensue. Milks can do this a bit...
View post on imgur.com
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #168
Sounds similar to me mate. I am a big fan of the hydroslates.
I think it goes back to, do the fish recognise it as a food source, hence there are the more instant baits and the slow burners that once they are on it, they are on it
Suppose it’s one thing having a whole load of aminos dancing around your bait but it’s another for a carp to instantly be drawn to them, maybe we are playing over kill in a lot of cases and don’t have a right balance.
The simple thing for me is our baits do not give the same signals as the waterworld does, aquatic life in most cases. We need something that they really want 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #167
I'm very much a fun of the AA route, just thought that the S Core was not much cop, certainly nowhere near as effective as the fish/shellfish hydro's, or the production of AA's via enzymes.
Just my view tho.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #166
The amino one is a funny one for me, makes total sense but the results in the water don’t to me
End of the day a carp has to recognise our bait as a food source or an attention picker. I have used all types of baits over the years and I wish I had a pound for every fish i had seen fish come over them and didn’t even take a look 
One of the better ones for me was the thick L030 and on reflection I swear that was purely down to the salt content, happy to be wrong
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #165
There was some long conversations between (I think) Harry Haskall and the bloke that come up with the ideas about S-Core that was published in one of the BCSG mags. Overall I think that the conclusion was that some of the theory behind it was a little flawed and the experiments performed non ideal.
I bought a bottle when it came out and similarly, found it of little use, even testing it in paste for bream and little carplets on the float.
|
|
|
|
Interesting what people say about S core. I was straight on the aminoplex / jigsaw liquids, made total sense. Around a dozen bottles later and it made total sense to drop it for me, not convinced, the theory is certainly there though. Can’t say it made a single bit of difference for me if im honest
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #162
Hi FPM,
Very interesting about the S-Core. it seems from what I read that it is common that baits focusing on just a few AAs has a very varying performance. We have and will be using fish meal as the main protein source and concentrate about getting the breakdown right.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #157
Hi Christian,
Don't concern yourself with my frustration, because it stays at a constant, manageable level.
That's an interesting account and reminds me of an elusive carp that got caught a couple of times on maggots. And we hear the stories of carp lakes being drained and the discovery of unseen, unknown carp.
I think carp are not all peas in a pod and some can show behavioural differences, as Viking pointed out with the character and feed response differences in his tank fish.
Your theory of changing baits to try and catch elusive fish that behave differently to the norm may have legs, but doesn't really address or add any further evidence to support your side of the contentious additives debate. Yes, you may say your common was caught on a flavour, but most fruit flavours contain some organic acids which can induce an investigation response and together with a bright colour I can believe that can be enough to induce a pick up. I believe that is why bright fruit pop ups work.
Just to be mischievous, re flavours, you might remember a previous post by MM, where he tested 4 of the top flavours in two different bases over 4 years and found no difference in results with or without flavours.
I look forward to your thoughts when have read the UCN thread.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #159
Hi Viking,
The flux rate was the most difficult part indeed. Concentration in the water isn’t a problem while massive feeding with pellets treated with the solutions but a real issue for singles or a limited prebaiting with boilies.
Though the effective range boundaries aren’t too narrow for Lys/Val molar ratio for example and easily achievable during construction of a recipe it’s impossible to achieve the ratio for the groups of aminos these two AA belongs to.
Frankly I didn’t get any noticeable results with these solutions perhaps due to flux factor unsolved.
Neither I got with bait made as close to 1,5 ratio as possible (by itself). It was as effective as other HNV baits I made. Nothing special. Nothing close to “involuntary feeding”. It was just impossible to know the free Lys/ free Val ratio because of the absence of the such data for all basemix ingredients.
As to S-Core the bait it was very peculiar ... being very dependent on place and conditions. It was catching on a very small spots on both ponds I was testing it ignoring the rest places at the ponds completely.
Fishmeal has very close to 1.5 Lys/Val ratio. That’s why I recommended BB to stick with it in your experiments.
I suppose the Enzyme bait might’ve been so successful due to ability of enzymes inside to broke fishmeal proteins in quantities close to the ratio needed. But this is just a guess of course.
FPM
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #153
Agree, lot of truth in that mate, even though there’s nothing wrong with worms. It’s people with a real passion for something that take things to the next level
|
|
|
|
Haven't made a milk bait since the late 80's to early 90's, can't comment on the newer milks, I would utilise Casein, Lactalbumin, Whole Egg Powder & Whey and go from there, add a cheese powder, yeast paste, amino liquid and flavour.
I suppose a lot depends on your bait design / making way of thinking as to ingredient usage and base-mix formulation.
Some say excess protein is wasted and not as biologically effective but there could be unknown feel good factors with regards milk proteins upon the carp which could negate this at times, all interesting nevertheless.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #155
Hi FPM,
I believe MM puts a lot of thought into the flux rate when using his amino acids. As (if i remember right) in Mills research the concentration of AAs in the water is important and they are most effective in a relative narrow window. Without very good control of your flux rate, how much feed you put in and maybe also knowledge about the water you fish it would be hard to achieve the right concentration in a real fishing situation.
Most research show that AA mixes gets more effective the more complex they get, and even more so with not only the AA fraction included. In these cases concentration and flux rate gets less important with an improved effect with increased concentration, up to a certain limit.
That is why I have more faith in hydrolysates than a bait which depends on a small selection of AAs. Not only do you get a large selection of amino acids and short peptides but also the added nucleotides etc from the chosen ingredients. I would also think a bait depending on just a few key attractants will be more sensitive to different external factors like background smells than a complex mix like a hydrolysate.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #157
Hi Christian
Orange dye is an attractor itself according to Jay Rider rating.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #150
Evening BB
I'm honestly not sure how to answer your post without increasing your frustrations, so I'll just leave you with an example from my own fishing. After a successful spring, summer and autumn a few years ago I had caught plenty of good fish but not one special common I really wanted. I had been using a fish and meat meal bait with added yeast and with a savoury flavour and hydro fish products. With winter approaching I asked a couple of previous captors of the fish what they had it on. I was surprised at the answer, they had both caught it on an orange fruity pop up. From then on in I swopped to a low protein birdfood with a fruity flavour and sweet feed liquids, and of course Orange dye. You know what's coming I'm sure, third session in along came the common. If this was just a one off I would put it down to coincidence but it's not, it's happened a few times since....you can wait an awful long time to catch ALL of the fish by staying on the same bait.....or if you include a combination of attractor types in one bait you might just attract more of the carp in your lake to your bait....To be fair I'd be interested to hear if others have had similar experiences.
Bob
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #155
Hi FPM,
I didn't mean any particular amino, I meant aminos in general.
I don't know which aminos MM is using and I wouldn't dream of asking him. It wouldn't do me any good anyway, because I haven't the tech knowledge to use them.
No, I haven't tried Feedstim's amino compounds and judging by your results, I haven't missed anything.
Yes, the enzyme was an amazing bait which showed the value of a superior amino feed signal.
My base for enz testing is indeed close to Pete's mix and addresses FLAA. That's the easy bit.
Thanks for your best wishes. We have put much time and effort into the project so far and are hoping for good things.
I don't know why tigers are so attractive.
Perhaps someone should ask MM.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #154
Hi BB,
What AA do you consider best in term of attraction I wonder? The thing is the list is changing constantly. It is mentioned that MM is playing with three of them. Which ones may I ask? Hara, Kasumyan, Wood ? Or Patric Mills favorites - Lys, Val and Gly? Or in between?
One of the P.Mills combinations is the S-Core by Richworth. Well, it works. Sometimes.
Yes, I’ve caught 6 fish during three hours on wild water once. Only once.
But how about the “old school” most effective- alanine, proline, cysteine... ? In the field not tank conditions?
Did you try FeedStim Winter and Summer amino Compounds? What were results if any? I didn’t notice any difference personally.... not between them but with and without them.
I’ve read the UCN thread. It seems it was a great bait indeed and worth of resurrection. If you try to repeat the success of this bait I wish you success. Sincerely. Just stick to Pete’s recipe. Fishmeal is the right ingredient for this concept of the bait. .
Just keep in mind a Tigernut as a bait or a sweet corn. Both with low protein content - 8-9%.
I agree to disagree .... though I’m a HNV fan myself
P.S. and what about Spanish 2?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #139
Hi FPM,
OK, so pheromones can induce a crustacean to hump a golf ball.
If you have ever watched, close up, carp during a mating frenzy, you can see how powerful pheromones can be. They certainly ain't interested in feeding.
Not sure what this has to do with carp feeding triggers.
Anyway, if you find a molecule that can induce a stronger feed signal than an amino, please let me know.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #149
Hi scozza,
I think you summed that up very well.
What I would say is, think about sport.
I love rugby and cricket mostly, but motor racing, darts and snooker bore me to tears.
But I understand that those that love those sports are just as passionate about them as I am about mine.
So good luck to them and each to their own.
Re bait science, there is a trade off that benefits us all.
Bait experts and fish scientists are the ones that discover all the useful info that is at our disposal.
Without them, we would still be using worms.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #143
I'll hold my hand up and say I'm pretty sure I've been guilty of over thinking the whole bait thing...but finally after 30 odd years of almost exclusively using my own baits things are starting to make sense to me. I've always gained a buzz from catching on my own baits, it add to my enjoyment.
Problem I find is that people making their own baits are getting fewer and fewer. The mags don't carry many, well none is probably a better description, articles on bait making. FB is a waste of space for serious discussion so that leaves the remaining forums...so it's hardly surprising it attracts people like me..old buggers with a passion for learning more about boilie making and bait in general... please forgive us our obsessions if we get a bit too heavy
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #144
I learnt to roll bait by being taught the basics by a mates dad when I started up back in '89, back then it was grab a bag of whatever basemix, chuck a few ml of a flavour in, roll and boil. I still roll my own not because I'm particularly interested in it as such, I'd just rather use something that nobody else is, and also because I like to use a variety of sizes in both round and dumbells together, buying off the shelf would mean buying a huge quantity to get it at a sensible price. Plus I don't have much freezer space so I roll mine fresh for each session normally, with just a tiny amount in my freezer for impromptu sessions. I just feel that all the science stuff people go on about, plus the time they appear to spend playing about with bait, would be better spent actually getting out there and doing a bit of fishing. That's what it's all about after all.. Also a lot of the science papers people refer to seem to be mostly regarding koi from what I can see, so not overly relevant at a guess?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #136
Hi Christian,
I don't dismiss any of your comments, like one or two on here who have said, re flavours etc. than they will not even listen to counter opinions. I try to keep an open mind and form my opinions based on the evidence presented. If an opinion of mine is proven wrong, I'm happy to change it, because what I'm interested in is the true reasons why and how things work.
Now, re your fishmeal comment, I haven't heard that said before, but my comment to that broad statement, would be, that it is far more complicated than that, because a fishmeal boilie is not a standard item.
There will be f/m baits that are very well constructed, using supplementary proteins to address FLAA and include complementary hydros which will produce a very effective feed signal, and that will prove to be successful all year round. At the other end of the spectrum will be a poorly made f/m with an unbalanced feed signal.
Re your attractor package, the scientific view on those additives is well known and says that there is little to nothing in them which will induce a food search response. Conversely, I have read many comments like your own where anglers have tested ingredients with comparison trials and are convinced of their results.
This is puzzling anecdotal evidence in the face of the science view, but I lean towards the science view and form my opinions around the products and chemicals that science does endorse.
Re my lean towards the science view, yesterday, on the fermenting boilies thread, MM gave the detailed scientific answer to the question he was asked re the growths on aging boilies. Nobody else knew the answer and seemed content to accept the explanation. Well, for years on this and other forums, people like MM have been answering tech questions on all matters of bait science which have mostly been gratefully accepted.
Now, product analysis is standard procedure in chemistry, and I ask myself how come science can get it right in most cases, except in the case of those contentious additives?
I'm not saying you and others are wrong. I'm saying that in my opinion, the weight of evidence is not on your side. I'm actually getting frustrated with these discussions, because I would like to get to the bottom of these issues and discover what is really going on.
Re your question about alternative hookbaits, I would think that when using your most successful baits, their feed signal is superior to that of the alternative hookbaits which would explain the success of the matching hookbaits. But if the alternative hookbaits work better, then I would think the opposite is the case.
Carp will tend to home in on the most stimulating feed signal.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #143
Does anyone else think some people think way too into this whole bait thing
Depends what your passion is. Some people love it 
I take an interest but I know when I've had enough. It makes perfect sense to me to create a bait that meets the dietary requirements of our quarry from a lot of perspectives.
Catching them is something else
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #147
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #143
I agree with you ip100. There are so many factors, variables and unknowns in the equation. Fairplay to those that spend the time pulling it apart. I really enjoy putting a bait together, learning about ingredients and find it very rewarding to catch on homemades. For me the deep science part takes it a little too far, and the fun starts to reduce. But I understand that on the flip side, the deep science increases enjoyment for others.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #145
Yes FPM
Milk proteins and Pre digested, hydrolysed ingredients, free Amino’s, are another world. I’m only just looking into it myself.
Bird foods are tightly guarded secrets, the competition would probably be able to copy them if too much information was available.
I like your Russian bait input on here. Different countries anglers look at the same topics and end goal, from a different angle.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #142
Right. Whatever you want. Fat, salt content, ratios between ingredients, between aminos, non protein ingredients ...etc . The most difficult part of it is to find data of AA composition of ingredients and it’s most impossible in case mixes (like bird foods or spice mixes).
Data of free aminos content is another lever.
S&D
I recall you question concerning milky proteins. There is another feature of their attractiveness to carp. Once broken they give some chemical cues into the water familiar to the fish. The right ones cues.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #143
Maybe overthinking, the holy grail doesn’t exist, you are right. But we would all like to maximise our results.
How did you learn to roll bait ? It is a process of learning, trial & error.
You would think differently if none of your home made Bait caught nothing all the time.
But you catch carp on it.
You have an interest in making bait, clearly, that interest keeps us thinking alike on carpforum
This thread is just aimed at the higher end of possible attraction and nutrition in carp baits.
But like you know, it isn’t the be all and end all.
we can catch on maggots & casters, tigers & tutti’s.
|
|
|
|
|
Does anyone else think some people think way too into this whole bait thing? Been rolling my own over 20 years and I haven't a clue what half of this thread even means. I just get stuff, chuck it together and see how it goes. More often than not it works well, my latest creation is by far the best I've ever made and regularly out fishes other baits massively. Seems to me people are looking for the holy grail of boilie but imo that doesn't exist.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #140
Excel spreadsheets are fine once they are set up how you want it set up.
Until then, they are a b*llache, setting up the rows and excel formulas, or until you have to add extra columns for new ingredients data. 
You can also include cost of finished bait.
Can help massively though on some stuff.
Paper/computer theory and ideas still have to work on the mixing bowl/rolling table, then the big trial in the real world fishing situation
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #140
Sounds like a very thorough and modern approach, not like the times we would write it down on scraps of paper.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #138
Hi Poots,
It’s just an Excel spreadsheet I was presented with when I started learning how to make baits. It’s all about calculating AA composition of a bait. Everyone can make it for himself. I was lucky not to begin from a zero point. I’ve enhanced it a lot of course. It contains AA profiles of 100+ base mix ingredients I may choose from.
In short it is a tool to make HNV bait fast and easy provided that you now basics about ingredients and their role in a mix.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #81
Hi NW,
Into continuation of anti-attractant topic. The rubbish one.
I googled some words and found out that there is a new science - Marine chemical ecology called.
Lot of interesting.
“Chemical cues play critical roles at every level in marine systems, but the omnipresence and impact of these cues are inadequately recognized. For most marine species, chemical cues determine whether they consume, fight with, run from, or mate with the creature next to them—as well as whether they are eaten by, infected by, or overgrown by natural enemies. Individuals can assess sex, social status, and even whether a potential mate is sperm depleted or sperm sufficient using chemical cues. These cues can be so powerful that male crustaceans will guard, carry, and attempt to mate with sponges, air-stones, rocks, or golf balls if these have been treated with the correct pheromone (Asai et al. 2000, Hardege et al. 2002, Breithaupt & Thiel 2008).”
The last sentence is for BB (hi BB) attention especially. I doubt AA are able to provoke such a strong behavioral response as pheromones do.
Among other functions of such chemical cues is one quit wondrous. There such micro beasts as microbes and bacteria as you may know. So there are findings that they can guard their food “ ....bacteria compete with larger animal scavengers by rendering carcasses chemically repugnant. Because food-fall resources such as carrion are major food subsidies in many ecosystems (Britton & Morton 1994)”
Now, let’s imagine that these beasts suddenly got a lot of easy and tasty food as our hydros which are protein broken by enzymes alike a carrion on the bottom. What will you do being a microbe (a hungry one)? Right ! You will try to contain the food for yourself - making “carcasses (of a bait) chemically repugnant”.
So, I doubt that microbes are able to frighten such a big animal as carp, but they make do it towards zooplankton. And what is zooplankton for carp? Right - food. But not only food but a marker of calmness and security. No Zoo around bait - no interest from fish side.
We know very little about underwater chemical language as far as I see so it may be not a rubbish at all.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #137
Hi FPM, "run it through your program"? Would you be willing to tell us more on this?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #126
Hi NW,
I run the recipe through my program and think that coconut meal there is for “add fat” purpose.
To open up the milk taste might be another.
FPM
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #135
BB
Any bait will catch carp, what ever the protein content. I suspect you dismiss my comment that some carp are just not attracted to fishmeal boilies, otherwise why would you stick with a bait which only relies on AA' s for attraction. You are missing out buddy, seriously missing out. Use a range of attractor and some starchy ingredients and you are in reality actually fishing for more fish. This is because there are now more carp that will be attracted and/or like the taste of your bait so more chance of taking your hookbait.
I know Viking has commented on some positive experience of tank tests but I remain unconvinced so while you think you have a level of proof that substantiates your ideas, in my opinion, and it is only an opinion, is that you have no more proof than I have to back up our ideas.
You are right about quality of angler, of course it will effect the success or otherwise of a bait. But if an individual fisherman compares his own results while using different baits it gives a useful comparison.
Here's a thought for you, there has been a lot of posts/topics regarding alternative hook baits recently. I know from experience that using them over a bed of boilies can be very successful, in fact I now have some of Marks specials to try out.....but, with the most successful baits that I have used (my own creations) the most successful hookbaits have been slight variations (hard hookers and pop ups) of the main base mix, far outfishing alternative hook baits. Not sure this means anything but it might.
Bob
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #133
Hi Christian,
Thanks for that, a very concise account of your bait philosophy.
As you would expect it differs from mine and I wouldn't be considering using anything like your attractor package.
I think any bait that isn't actually repellant will catch if it contains a reasonable amount of protein.
It seems there will always be a difference of opinions re the contentious additives, like flavours, EO's, palatants, salt and sugars, because it is difficult for the users to definitively prove that they have the positive effect they claim. It's quite possible that some baits work in spite of some of the additives in them and not because of them.
Another factor to further complicate the issue is the competence of the anglers. It seems on most lakes that the top 10% of anglers catch the majority of the fish. So who is actually using a particular bait can have a bearing on how successful a bait is considered to be.
Anyway, we are still agreeing to disagree and that's no problem, because I know my dad can beat your dad.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #133
Hi Christian,
It may be an “empty” zero protein bait catching very good due to flavor and a decently made boil without flavor (and EO) doing the same.
The story is that I took part as a tester in a little competition of baits provided by new bait companies in my country. There were four testers only. 1 kg of boilies from each bait company we’re given to all testers. And they had to fish with this 4 kg of boilies during the whole season. 5 months in Russia it is. All baits proved to be effective at the end.
The first two places took boilies as described. The winner was plain semolina by look. The second one was made without any liquids except eggs and was hard as rock.
These results ware a great revelation for me as I am a rookie baitmaker as it shows that quite different approach to bat construction have a right to live. In this respect joining the forum recently I was not surprised to success of Mark’s Spanish 2 bait.
My personal baitmaking experience though very modest shows approximately the same. Every time that I make a new bait the unflavored version is tested first. And catches fish in most cases.
So. I would make my ultimate bait in full conformity with your plan but I do know now that it may be unnecessary to include all this ingredients in the mix.
Hi BB
I can’t say definitely about percentage (90/10) either as it is may vice versa just as easily.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #129
BB
I have no idea on percentages they add to attraction as some may affect taste as well but I would NOT use a bait that did not contain:
An artificial flavour, or combination of, at low(ish) level....but there are flavours and flavours, I stick to ones I know work, probably got a list of about half a dozen I am confident in.
An EO or aromatic chemical again at low level, again I choose from a very short list and select to compliment the flavour
A palatent to compliment the flavour, these often could be powdered or liquid, these may affect taste more than attraction
Yeast - usually a mixture of ordinary brewers yeast and barocel, although I would use high nucleotide yeast if I could access some...I would not have much confidence in any bait that did not contain yeast
A bulk oil - high level in the summer, low in the winter
In addition in some mixes mainly savoury but not exclusively, I would add a mix of spice powders.
By using these in a bait with next to no free AA's would (has for me) caught plenty of carp however I would not nowadays use a bait without free AA's because as you say they are very attractive. However if I had to choose between AA's and the above I would use my attractor package and not the AA's
My free AA attraction would come from a mixture of hydrolysed powders and liquids. In the summer I would also want some none hydrolysed high protein products, in the winter I reduce the protien content considerably and add starch/sugar and sugary liquids.
I have found that where ever I have fished there are always fish that do not get caught (or caught very often) on boilies, especially fishmeal boilies. Add yeast and spices and bingo, those hard to catch fish start to appear, replace the fishmeal with a starchy product and the effect is even better. So much so that i rarely use fishmeal anymore, relying on milk protien powders for the protien content in my bait. I don't think these baits are any better than fishmeals for quantities of fish they just (for me) seem to pick out the rarely caught fish. I think "natural" fish are less attracted by fishmeals than pellet reared fish.
Hope this explains, Bob
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #130
.
Ideal... That's the type of thing I had in mind, thanks!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #125
Hi Mark,
I believe you are very wrong if you dismiss tank testing.
Here is a short story:
A professors decided to make attractants for several species. He hired another professor to help out and found a person willing to finance the project.
This went on for years, tank testing only. Testing was done in summers and in holidays as both professors had jobs at universities. Chemicals was tested and tested again in combination with eachother. After some years they had several mixes of chemicals ready, all suited for different species. Due to various circumstances this came to a halt due to health issues and as they did not really have the time or the network to have it commercialised. Then they met some guys from a bait company. They agreed to start field testing. Since this was in autumn the first bait they developed was one for arctic char, a popular target species for ice fishing.
The common bait used here was naturals, like maggot, worms and bits of prawn.
A test team was put together. Results was outstanding. On many occations the bait outfished natural baits like maggot by a huge margin. Now remember, this was wild fish that never had seen this bait before. No prebaiting had been done and still the fish often preferred this bait over a bunch of wriggling maggots.
Now, a couple of years later this bait is sold in over 60 shops in two countries. Scandinavias larges distributor of maggots have contacted the company and asked if they could distribute the bait.
Now, tell me again how tank testing is a waste of time? 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
Okay NW to answer your initial post and keeping with your instructions (Almost)
Milk Protein Smooth 30%
Micellar Casein 20%
Acid Whey 15%
Hydro Whey Pro 5%
Egg Albumin 5%
Whey Gel 5%
Lamlac 20%
The first six items are from a body building/supplement outlet. The last two are from fishing outlets or in the case of the lamlac from a farming store. Approx protein content 65-70%
However I don't think I would ever use it.....it's too easy to improve with none milk products
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #122
Hi Christian,
Yes, of course we can agree to disagree without having to resort to comparing genitalia.
I have a couple of questions if I may.
You say you believe there is far far more to attraction than AAs and I agree up to a point, but probably not to such a degree, so can you explain what you think these many other factors are?
I have said I believe that AAs are responsible for at least 90% of attraction.
I wonder what % figure you would put on it?
The UCN thread has a lot of chit chat, but is worth wading through to the end.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #127
Yes, it's interesting and has been awaited for some time now. But just as with meat replacers for humans, you can get the nutritional profile right, but in a taste test it fails badly. Sure it will be ok if the staple dieet of the poultry consists of this, they have no other option, but when compared with fishmeal in an actual fishing situation i am not that sure that it will really compete. But who knows, use some high tec protein for the basic nutrients and go wild with the attractors and maybe it is a real alternative.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #126
You are wellcome!
FMR omega it’s a soy concentrate from Holland, its AA profile is similar to Standard fishmeal. A substitution in fact.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #123
Thanks. Interesting recipe. Had to look up the FMR Omega. Seems to be a vegetable protein mix of non-disclosed composition, but the recommended feed level is 5 to 10% only in agricultural feedstuffs.
Not sure what the coconut powder brings apart from attempting to copy the flavour of Cell (which may/may not be coconut powder).
Overall though, I suspect this is probably a better mix than a lot of the stuff that is sold
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #124
You answered your own question mate, before you tested it on the fish in the tank.
All this testing on fish in tanks. Natural carp are effected by the moon. So are carp in a tank, maybe less so, but they are still effected. I know, that if I give some carp in a tank, something on one moon phase... They are not going to take it, or get excited by it. Same thing, right moon phase... Boom.
Not you Viking, but all these scientists, don't even really understand how a carp works in the first place. In my head, their tests mean nothing. The fish does not have a natural diet. Give a starving tank fish, something crap, it will still go mad for it.
Your fishing will tell you far more than any tank test mate. Don't be to wrapped up in that. Honestly.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #41
I just tasted my Peptopro and it has a distinct bitter/sour taste while the hydro whey is much more mellow and milky. Not that this really matter much.
I tried introducing both in the tank and both induced food search and sampling. Pepto seemed to be spat out faster. If I should judge from this the whey seemed more popular. However, testing is pretty worthless without repetition so don't take this as gospel.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
Hi HW,
And here you are.
Sweet milk bait. from TheBaitMan 
FMR omega - 25%
Cornmeal (white) - 20%
Nutrilac. - 20%
Yogurt powder. - 12%
Miccelar Casein - 4%
WPC 80. - 3%
Whey Hydrolisate- 4%
Egg albumin - 2%
Lactose 20 - 3%
Coconut powder - 5%
Niger seeds - 2%
Poppy seeds - 2%
Eggs. - 4-5
CSL liquid - 15ml
To freeze immediately after rolling
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #112
BB
I hope we can agree to disagree on this, everything I have have experienced with my baits suggest that there is far far more to attraction than AA's there really is. And yes I am suggesting carp have taste preferences, absolutely certain.
I really really don't care what science says about either of these statements, it is completely irrelevant to me.
I have never said I use vecon etc as a protein source, I only mentioned it connection with its use as a Human taste enhancer and that it can be overloaded, and the coincidence or otherwise that it is based on HVP.
Thought I would follow your advice and look at the UCN thread, well eventually found it, sorry I missed it was on another forum site. Anyway it has 1500 posts....might be a while before I get through it...but I will let you know what I think.
Bob
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #113
Hi NW,
Yes, he did awhile ago, but since then he posted the gist of his, then current mix, which used three selected AAs as its main attraction.
I think, at the time, he was in touch with a lot of research that was testing single, double and triple AA attraction.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #118
Yes I remember your story at another thread here 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #118
Classic!!!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #117
Ok, then I will not touch it with a dirty stick
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #116
Viking,
Yes. It’s Northern baits stuff
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #114
FPM
Daphnia Extract? Is that sold anywhere?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #111
NW,
Yes, 70ml per kilo of the thick stuff.
Your mix sound pretty similar to mine, except we did not hydrolyse it further. I also used 20% krill meal.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #109
My favorite hydros are Pure Aminol and Daphnia Extract. Didn’t notice any overdose effect with any of these liquids.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #112
I thought MM used his 'Bromelain Soup' method, BB?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #83
Hi Christian,
I have always said that some substances other than AAs have an effect on attraction, nucleotides being one, but they are very much secondary to AAs. I would think if you asked MM he would say the same because he already has on another thread. His own special bait he makes is based on the attraction of three selected AAs. He doesn't use enzymes, although he could if he chose to, but will say that a true enzyme bait in terms of AA attraction is head and shoulders above any standard bait, in spite of whatever other ingredient factors it might contain.
All I'm saying is, I believe that at least 90% of attraction is down to free AAs.
I don't remember you asking me about tigers, and I don't know the answer, but I did myself, post on another thread the composition of tigers and peanuts and asked what was the attraction, considering that they had little in common.
You seem to be implying that carp have taste preferences and are capable of making choices. According to research this not the case and that their receptors merely respond to chemical signals and if their receptors tell their brain that it is food they will eat it by reflex.
In terms of a well constructed mix, no one would consider using vecon or hacho miso as a main protein.
But they are good additives to add free AAs and any other useful chemicals they may contain.
Like you said, good discussion this.
BB.
PS, did you read that UCN thread? If so I would be interested to hear you thoughts.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #109
Viking, I know you used the 'good krill', 70ml per kg I recall?
I've used it a lot, and like it, 50ml was/is good for me, 100ml didn't make the bait any more effective. This was in conjunction with 5% CPSP90, and proteases to work on 35% LT94, and 10% WPC80 in the base mix. I suspect the total amount of final 'hydrolysed' content was reasonably high.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #106
In my opinion they really like milk proteins, not sure it's taste though I wouldn't dismiss it, it could be the high protein content breaking down and releasing the AA' s making the bait attractive.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #83
"Then if the carp actually like the taste of our bait then this will increase the amount they eat, exactly the same as humans and animals and in this case I do believe the analogy does stand up."
I agree taste is very important in bait, and often underrated.
In the tests done with krill hydro on perch (I believe it was) 5% was optimum, no changes in palatability was seen at 10%. However, for attractant purpose I believe a higher inclusion rate might be beneficial. Also I think we should consider the leakage from a bait left in the lake for any amount of time, if you want it to be on optimum level when it is picked up by the fish overdosing might be a good idea. However, when feeding some hydrolysates in near pure form (just with a thickening agent), they are picked up and spat out. This typically happens a couple of times before they are left alone. Others seem to be palatable and gets swallowed, and the carp keep searching in the area.
From my experience krill hydro can hardly be overdosed. Tank testing and experience from fishing say they will happily eat whatever you soak in it. Other hydros may differ. This may well be because of bitter peptides formed during hydrolysation.
That more factors than AAs comes in to play is strongly indicated when scientists have done comperative testing by replicating the AA content of food extracts and compared these to the real stuff.
Even thou the AA fraction is the one playing the biggest part the real stuff usually is more attractive than the AAs alone.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #107
Rod Hutchinson used to think there was something in it. The taste of milks.
I also think certain carp show a taste preference.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #106
I think so.
Not a scientific answer... there a lot of milk protein pop-up bases mixes now. It is possible to make a pop up for example with krill meal, dried daphnia, gammarus etc. light ingredients but milk proteins are preferred.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #102
Just putting this out there, besides the nutritional attraction, Do you think certain carp like the taste of quality milk proteins ?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #103
Neil.... If you want to chat about tigers, could you please start another thread, as this one keeps getting dragged off the initial question
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #101
Thanks a lot mate!
But it really goes better after some beer
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #100
Would Resistant starch have no affect on carp then?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #100
Tigers - all about oils .... and sugars
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #99
Your English is good mate!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #98
Human gut.... Relevance to carp is?
Tigers... All about sugars...
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #90
NW,
“Get your bait bod on here if he wants a chat “
I will do my best but he is shy when sober. Joke 
The real reason is he is not good in English....as I am. We are both Russians 
But I tested his baits and have a reason to believe in his approaches and knowledge. He helped me to make first step in baitmaking two years ago.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #97
It's not all about their protein though like I said read about their human benefits.... they improve the gut which in turn helps the gut digest protein better which may help carp get more protein out of the rest of their diet ;-)
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #95
No... Stop now. Tigers are only 5% protein. You then boil them for ages. No further discussion required.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #93
Indeed yes, AA'S, sugars, loads of others I suspect. This one is about milks tho
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #83
You say ita not AAs for tigernuts. I have just looked at the aa profile for them and they contain a good profile iMO, 20 aas and also if you look at the nutritional benefits scientifically proven for humans (quick Google search) you will soon realise why they are so attractive to carp.
I'm no scientist and am intreagued by the recent conversations on here by you all that obviously know far more about aas and protein breakdown than me but looking at some tigernut facts it is clear to me there is more going on there than what meets the eye ;-)
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #92
Back to the Protein
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #83
Though I’m a fun of AA attraction and HNV baits and i’m used to calculating AA composition of my baits.
And there is Mark’s S2 that proves existence of another side of attraction. I would love to understand it as everyone here I believe.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #91
I'm not sure, it's unlikely our man can recall either. I do remember him saying he just used semo, soya, gluten, flavour and hermesetas. His daughter kept knicking the strawberry ones as he was rolling.
The written account was fascinating.
But I don't want to proceed and divert this thread, good luck in your quests boys, we never stop learning.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #85
Was that in a Richworth 50/50 base mix ( 50% protein/ 50% other ingredients )
or was that in Hutchys protein mix ?
Not forgetting the liquid Hermasetas, a new taste sensation extreme Sweetness for the time and the emulsified effect on the Pukka Salmon.
Results speak volumes in the real world, but we cannot stop learning, ever.
Looking back at the past, or pioneering forward with new data, there are clues we missed.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #85
Lot more than just oil in the ole Pukka Salmon, Poots!!!
This started as a theoretical question by myself on milks, purely milks and has been dragged off piste.
FPM.... Get your bait bod on here if he wants a chat
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #88
No worries, I've probably posted a few rambles myself.....
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #86
I know Christian, you're absolutely right, that was a post lunch ramble and a surfeit of vin rogue (sp). 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #81
Hi NW,
Mouses are first for trials before medicines to be approved for humans. There are lot of common in fish nutrition. And I agree there are specifics for various types of fishes too. Age is a point too. I doubt that freebies can do any harm to adult carp unless they are eaten by kgs during few months in a raw.
Anti attractants caused by water microorganisms is a completely new info for me as I said before but you may agree that a strong poo in the lift is quite an alternative to good perfume of a nice lady.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #85
But to those participate it is very interesting and as far as I know doesn't cause any harm, if we don't discuss we won't learn.
|
|
|
|
Forgive my ignorance and intrusion but this bait ******** went round in ever decreasing circles on the black forum. The fact is, nobody has harnessed the real deal and the best options are Hookbaits, be it Matts, Marks or any other pop up. That's the story. Science tells us bumble bees cannot fly and oils don't attract carp. Facts differ, white paper all you like but it don't change facts.
Mcdonald and Springate, The Cons, Pukka Salmon oil. The end.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #79
Hi BB,
The anti attractant effect of zoo is completely new issue for me but worth of some research. Can’t argue it now.
Hydros can’t inhibit taste. Some of them and vegetable ones especially are straight taste enhancer in food industry. Soy sauce for example. Yeasts - another one.
How they can affect digestion?
“These results can be explained by the fact that high levels of hydrolyzed reflect the decrease of secretion of digestive enzymes by the large amount of small peptides and free amino acids in the gastrointestinal tract”
“Indispensable amino acid concentrations decrease in tissues of stomachless fish, common carp in response to free amino acid- or peptide-based diets.“
In terms of carpcare I believe these results are worth of consideration. Especially if attractions rates are the same for 4% and 10% dose rates.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #78
BB
We have had this discussion before, you are blinded by AA's, there are far more factors in play with attraction than AA's.
I asked last time why are tiger nuts so attractive to carp? You didn't answer, but we both know it's not AA's. If we can harness these other forms of attraction ALONGSIDE the AA attraction then we are onto something much more useful than simply adding more AA's
Then if the carp actually like the taste of our bait then this will increase the amount they eat, exactly the same as humans and animals and in this case I do believe the analogy does stand up. Improving the nutrition will not have the same result, if it would the animal feed industry would not need to produce palatents at all.
Hydrolysed vegetable protein can be overloaded, we wouldn't put a jar of Vecon into a pot of soup, it would completely spoil it, but a spoonful would improve the taste. Hydrolysed milk protein including petpro has, according to the reviews on the sellers web site, a very bitter unpleasant taste unless flavoured. Now we don't know what carp like taste wise other than by experimentation in our baits, but they like things I find disgusting, but it seems to me entirely likely that there will be optimum levels with regards taste...more is not necessarily better
Good discussion this
Bob
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #80
Your observations on hydro milks are very interesting Christian, and the fact that you've dabbled with combinations and found there may be a ceiling for their use (for whatever reason) that's been evaluated from actual angling results is fascinating, so thank you... That was part of the concept behind my original post, which appears to have been sidetracked (albeit in a good way).
Thanks to BB for your input too, all good stuff!!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #77
Mmmm.... Both of those papers you have cited are larval fish, one being Tilapia. That's like saying humans can't eat steak because a one week old baby would not have the ability to digest it.
Zooplankton will excrete waste products of anything they consume, not just hydro's.... And they excrete some form of anti-attractant?? Sorry this is utter rubbish and a poorly researched example by your bait man.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #74
Thanks very much for the data sheet, it was for high nucleotide yeast so very interesting. I don't have the one for biomax product on this computer so will have to check later.
I wasn't aware I suggested that higher levels of AA's were detrimental to the carps welfare, I certainly didn't intend to. What I did say was that hydrolysed products in too a high levels could be detrimental to the baits TASTE.
I am confident in my baits attraction and it is nutritionally adequate, which leaves me with taste to worry about.
In my experience increasing the levels of hydrolysed milk proteins can lead to fewer runs, it really is as simple as that, I don't know why, I can only theorise.....no one knows for certain but we can discuss it, that's the fun, and if we keep open minds we can all learn, I know I am always picking up snippets of information on here that I think are worth a further look. What I won't do is accept something science says unless results on the bank clearly back it up, and in this case in my fishing they do not, there is an optimum level of hydrolysed milk proteins in a bait, I am convinced.
Nutritionally this should not be the case, but it is, so I theorise that it is because they affect the taste of a bait and in the absence of any other theory I am going with it.
Agree 100% with your final sentence, but it's just that it is possible we can go to far and spoil an otherwise good bait.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #77
Hi FPM,
I've covered most of what I would say in my post to Christian.
You say that hydros are food for zooplankton, but all bait will be so, whether predigested or broken down by lake bacteria.
As I said, hydros are just normal additives that have had some of their protein broken down. How could that inhibit taste? How can free aminos overdose gustation?
Free aminos in a steady stream of the right mix and concentration is the ultimate in feed attraction.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #73
Hi Christian,
In our bait we mostly use a mix of processed proteins. Now if you consider that these proteins are acceptable to the carp in terms of gustation, ( taste ), then why is it you think that by breaking down some of that protein, this will, somehow affect taste? When the bait is in the water, the protein will eventually be broken down completely anyway. Remember that hydrolysates are not taste enhancers, they are just protein sources, partly predigested to produce free AAs to enhance attraction. Yes, some of them, like yeasts contain useful substances that can aid attraction, but carp are hardwired by evolution to search for and respond to free aminos.
You say the extra attraction from a few more available AAs isn't going to make any difference, but it could make all the difference between an average bait and a superb bait. The most important factor to any bait is its AA feed signal. The carps reflex feed system makes it so.
It is the reason enzyme baits are so much more effective than any standard bait.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #70
Hi BB,
The bait man’s mood is back to business unfortunately but he kindly provided me with two links to the abstracts in support to his approach.
http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-86722017000100001
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16733614/
And there is another point ... hydro is a food not only for fish but for zooplankton as well. Certain types of zoo may excrete some anti attractants he said.
At the same time I’m reeding a new RB site and that new Game bait contains 5 hydro plus an emulsified one. I wonder what is the total content of them?
My point of view is that there no harm in inclusion of higher rate of liquid hydros to the bait and to remain within low levels in freebies. Frankly i’ve tried to substitute water or eggs in liquid part of my mixes with good results.
And I think Christian has a point about overdose in terms of gustatory issues too.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #7
It’s pretty much made to order.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #6
That would be the one.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #73
Hi Christian
Hope the data sheet was of help.
In regards to higher levels of free amino acids being of detriment to the carp's welfare, I can't help but having to be thinking that you are incorrect.( or who has been speaking to you )
The detailed analogy I feel was somewhat inaccurate in regards to the carp and more so in what is trying to be achieved in terms of attraction and detection.
We ( this is not my analogy) are merely trying to light up as many lights on the olfaction and gustation boards of the carp.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #58
BB
If it was only about attraction and nutrition then yes in theory then possibly you could increase the percentage of hydrolysed milk products but the carp do pick up our baits and eat them so taste has to be considered.
Now I know carp aren't the same as humans or other mammals but nevertheless here's an analogy for you.
Many of our foods and indeed other animal feed contain products that enhance the taste, this is to increase the intake. In farm animals this is to increase their weight to make them worth more and in humans its to encourage us to eat more (so products get brought more). In both cases humans and farm animals it is modifying the taste, not the nutrition, that causes a greater intake.
Now it probably is completely different in carp, but then again it might not be. Now one very common enhancer is hydrolysed vegetable protein. In products that we might add to bait it's found in Vecon, Braggs aminos and Magi sauce.
Now we would only add small quantities of these products to our food to enhance the taste, in fact adding too much could ruin the taste of the food. Do I think their is a limit in adding these products to our baits that would tip them over from being tasty to the carp to be repulsive...absolutely I do, even though the they are adding valuable available protein.
I've said this before I know but I want a bait that the carp enjoy the taste of, I have plenty enough attraction in their alreay, they will investigate my bait, the extra attraction from a few more availabe AA's isn't going to make any difference....but it might affect the taste which for me is paramount and my experience places a limit on the amount a hydrolised protein that shoud be in a bait.
Hope this makes sense.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #71
I used it from day 1 and i do know the enzymes were tweeked as the first baits they sold didn't do much and to be honest weren't very effective but after pete changed one enzyme the bait really came into its own.
I did used to keep bait in a cool box when left in my car and this bait was always still ok after a week very little difference to how i got them (i always could squash them in my fingers)
I did worry about the bait i took to france as i flew to my mates house and had no way of keeping it cool but that was fine till i ran out of bait around the 5th day, i didnt however let the bait dry out or leave it it the sun.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #68
Hi Woody,
I think Pete changed some of his enzymes during the time the bait was available and perhaps they made the bait more user friendly, but I remember Jaffa saying that he and his mates had to be careful in hot weather, using cool boxes, and that one time he put a couple of baits on top of the box in the hot sun and watched them break down to crumb.
Like you, they all said it was, by far, the best bait they had ever used.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #67
Hi FPM,
I'm with NW on this, in that it doesn't make much sense to me, and that MM would be able to give a diffinitive answer to the question of protein digestion.
The hydros we use are only partly broken protein. Most of them are not produced for fishing, but for animal feed and human consumption. They tend to have small amounts of free AAs, but are mainly broken to a mixture of different sized peptides, which still have to be broken to free AAs in the water.
Nevertheless, they will be easier for the carp to assimilate than full polymer protein.
However, we pay the extra cost for these additives because of their effect on attraction.
To limit the use to 5-10% if you want your bait to last a long time in the swim, is a choice you can make, but if you want a bait that is better than any commercial bait available, then hydros and/or enzyme use is the way to go, as testified by Woody below.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #67
Hi FPM, it will be interesting to see what he says then. I'm not sure I'm really in agreement with much you've posted though.
I'd be very wary of extrapolating any data from juvenile fish, especially marine flatfish, and inferring those principles apply to full grown cyprinids. However, MystyM, who has I suspect a whole library of papers on this, is far more qualified to comment.
Hydrolysate... Just taste....???? Everything is hydrolysed to an extent, within one form or another in order for it to be absorbed into the bloodstream.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #49
What i remember of the ucn bait was that it was soft from just after being made and did soften a little more but i never had it turn to mush even when kept in the boot of my car for a week in summer, and i frequently used it for week long sessions even taking it to the south of france for a week in summer.
It was a fantastic bait though definitely the best bait i have ever used.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #49
Hi BB
The bait man I’d mentioned has registered at the forum during our talk deep at the night. Unfortunately it always takes time to be approved in order to log in. I hope he will be in the right mood to continue in the morning but sometimes the mood might be completely different the next day morning after a good party. So I will be happy if he proceeds and explain the figures himself.
For the time being I may try to explain what I got out of it.
1. It’s wrong approach to regard hydrolisates as food in bait construction. They are used as to provide a concentrated from of taste (like Knorr cubes). So 5-10gr is more than enough for attractiion purposes. Hydros are very soluble and provide quick but short attraction.
Another point is high percentage of salt in hydros.
2 This Issue is more difficult to apprehend... The key phrase was “Amino acid which are not used to synthesis protein or that are released from protein during degradation must be broken down and excreted from organism since the body’s no mechanism to store them”. Some words like acidosis (internal), gut microflora followed but I didn’t understand the subject. Nevertheless I tried to google some words and found out some scientific abstracts telling that applications of hydro in aquafeed 1) do change metabolites (long list) in fish tissue 2) at levels more than 10%of FPH reduced the growth and feed utilization but increase feed intake of juvenile turbot.
FPM
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #65
If anyone else wants to view the data sheets, contact me via pm with your email address
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #64
Hi Christian, the Autolysed yeast I use is high in nucleotides.
Don't discount paste, I use it alongside boilies as a vehicle of added attraction saturating the area. If there's nuisance fish or worse , diving ducks use 60mm balls of paste.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #63
John, no it's not the autolysed yeast it's the nucleotide yeast. I think Barocel is autolysed but could be wrong, is the one you have from biomax, if so I have that data sheet, if not.I'll pm you as you say, thanks very much.
I'm afraid paste does not work in my angling situation, I need the properties of a boiled bait.
Bob
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #62
Hi Christian , I take it that you are referring to Autolysed yeast which is high in nucleotides. It's not cheap to purchase in small amounts. Your looking at around £20 for 500g, myself and Butterbean have the relative data sheets. Send me your email address via pm and I'll send it to you.
I've used Peptopro, 12% hydro whey , Autolysed yeast alongside other ingredients for a number of years. I have not noticed any negative effects using both hydro Casien and whey alongside.
I use it in paste and other applications, I don't make boilies with them though, for good reason.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #61
Have a look at the Ohly web site, there are some seriously technically advanced yeast products on there, give you some idea what is available, trouble is I have no idea who might stock it...
If anybody on here knows where I could get some X- SEED Nucleo advanced yeast or even Ohly-GO Nucleo by Ohly I will be forever in your debt
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #60
Thanks for that
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #59
There is an ok breakdown of Brocacel at the Feedstim webpage.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #57
Hi Christian,
Not had any data sheets to compare the Brocacel with my previous go to yeast powder, human grade Holland & Barrett brewers yeast.
You have opened my eyes about the Brocacel not being much better in protein or B vitamin content than the normal ones.
Thought being concentrated, it would be a bit better.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #55
Hi Christian,
I know that some milk hydros used as protein shakes have a problem with bitter taste, which I am led to believe is caused by short peptides. But if you check the info on peptopro, it is subject to a final, special hydro process which largely eliminates the bitterness, which it would undoubtedly have given the high hydro.
I know that carp receptors can become saturated with AA signals, but would doubt that say 5% of peptopro would be able to do that in a fishing situation. The attraction would be fast compared to untreated protein, but the short peptides still need to be broken down by lake orgasms to free AAs.
I can understand that, when fishing overnighters and the usual take time being after first light, that a slower attraction release to coincide with it might be advantageous, but this brings me back to the UCN enzyme bait, which released a massively effective feed signal.
Read the UCN thread as I suggested to see what you make of the use of enzymes and protein breakdown.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #54
What is more concentrated in the brococel? Protein and b vitamin content is almost the same. I am assuming it's the nucleotide and beta glucans but never seen a data sheet. Generally I would use a yeast content of 10% made up of plain brewers yeast and brococel or if I could get it at the right price nucleotide yeast.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #38
Hi KB,
I wouldn't make and use the mix I posted, I was just answering the question.
I use fishmeal as my main protein and supplement with milk protein etc. to address FLAA.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #49
BB the reason I dropped the peptpro was because I thought the attraction was too high and was easier to control with the lesser hydrolysed product. At the time I only fished overnight and perhaps there was too much attraction in the water. It could also be down to taste I understand from people who use this stuff as intended as a protein shake consider hydrolysed products very bitter and almost undrinkable. I know carp taste things differently but even the old mud pigs must have a palatable limit.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #53
Hi Viking,
Maybe because it is more concentrated than the normal brewer Yeast types included in baits, or maybe it is super soluble, and need to err on the lower side in it's inclusion levels, just my thoughts.
However I would like to see how high I could go with it, as I really like it's unique taste within a bait.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #48
Hi Scaley,
I've seen the recommended inclusion rates but was just interested in if there was a particular reason they are so low.
All sorts of yeasts seem to intrigue the carp.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #51
Hi BB,
That is my understanding of it, a very useful ingredient indeed.
At 5% Potentially more so in lower quality mixes. Could make a big difference.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #45
Hi scaley,
Brocacel is said to aid digestion so I would think yes, but it has other benefits, like its AA content, minerals, vitamins and nucleotides.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #47
Hi Viking,
I’m Shamelessly trying to keep within a budget...lol l. But saying that, I’m dubious of its effectiveness at 3%.
I did read that 5% is the norm, do you have another opinion?
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #41
Hi Christian,
I have no idea why using both whey and casein hydros would not seem to work together.
If you check their AA profiles, they are not too dissimilar, but the peptopro would break down quicker due to the higher hydro and short peptides.
The suggestion, by FPM's bait man that hydros be used at a low limit, I think, may be ref to wanting the bait to breakdown more slowly over a longer period in the swim, and perhaps for cost issues.
However, the opposite is the case when using a full on enzyme bait like Pete B's UCN. This bait, if allowed, would break down completely to mush, such was the effect of the enzymes. He said the bait was most effective if left to soften until just about usable.
I suggest you all read the UCN thread on Fishingwarehouse forum to form your own opinions on the use of enzyme hydrolysis.
It is the sole reason why Viking and I are trying to emulate it.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #47
Correct me if I am wrong here, but Brocacel recommended dosages were 2-5 % max I thought?
If I was to go much higher, would need a good think about it.
That and the fact there are lots of other solubles in this potential mix ( unless we are making a paste bait ) some form of compromise would have to happen with the milk proteins to keep it rollable in a boiled bait
Experience and many experimental mixes will get the desired end result we desire, in the end
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #45
Why the low ratios?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #45
I use it at 3%, but not sure it’s made much difference at that ratio.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #44
Would adding 2-3% of Brocacel yeast maximise the milk protein mix nutrient breakdown once eaten, as well as adding a good source of B vitamins.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #36
Hi FPM,
Doesn't make any sense to me.
Hydros of fishmeal, milks, yeasts etc. are the exact same products, but which have had some of their protein broken down, which as Scaley said aids digestion.
However, we include them mainly to improve attraction.
When a bed of boilies has been in the water for several hours, the lake bacteria will gradually break down the protein completely while releasing a big feed signal.
All we do with hydros or added enzymes is speed up the process.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #40
He confirmed 5%max. Soluble. And including liquid ones.
Some issues with digestion in the long run.
He is driving now. Promised more details tonight (after beer time)
He said there is no difference between 4%. and 10% in terms of attraction.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #31
Mike
Two reasons, I don't think they hold as much moisture as other ingredients and so dry out very quickly.
Second I always seemed to catch best when the baits were fresh, even now when I go over 15% milk protein I like to freeze asap.
Bob
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #28
BB, I had started of with 5% inclusion of a whey product with 25% hydrolysis, and it worked well, although was very attractive to bream as well. The 5% came from a n article by Geoff Bowers I think. Anyway could not get that product anymore and started using one that had12/13% hydrolysis. Still caught well. Then saw Peptpro and tried swopping it for the whey at same quantity. It worked but not as well, trouble is other things could be in play, very much gut feeling to be honest, tried using both together and catchs fell right off. Ever since just kept to the whey product. I am pretty sure less is best in many cases
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #36
BB and myself got an enzyme project going and we aim for a very high amount of hydrolyzed protein in this. Then again we don't focus on boiled baits at this stage. In a boiled bait it limits itself on the rollability as it gets sticky at higher rates, usually at 15-25 % depending on other ingredients.
The only reason to keep inclusion rates low that I can think of is because of the salt content of some hydros. Or with some enzymes bitter compounds may be formed that affect palatability but I doubt that is an issue in a commercial product. But he may well have other, valid reasons. Any particular hydro he say should be max 4%?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #33
Damages to the fish - really.... surely that cannot be right.
What with an easier to digest food, more availability of key Amino Acids, less stress on the fishes system as it gets the benefit from said bait or paste.
Sounds like a budget issue TBH.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #37
Full on milk proteins are an interesting concept. I have always thought tho that what they make up for in protein, aminos ans soluble attractiveness, they lacked in many other aspects of what carp need. I love milks in all of my baits but I feel happier and get better results when you round a bait off with the other elements like salts minerals and liquids.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #34
Hi NW
No, I don’t think so as he is selling ingredients as well.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #35
That’s good. I would love to use more.
To make a point.... he said that about freebies. That’s mean big quantities and freebies considered as a food.
For baits (even more for high attract ones) it’s different.
Suppose that he had in mind powdered hydro not liquid ones. The latter go out of bait quickly.
Buy the way what is highest possible inclusion rate suggested then? For example of fish hydrolisate?
And alongside with predigested fishmeal as well?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #34
Got to agree on that. Sounds wrong.
Some hydros work their best at a higher level than that. And that in a pellet that is eaten immediately, not in a boilie that will sit on the bottom leaking for hours.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #33
I'm not convinced by that one bit. 4% max? Sounds like that was purely based on cost, not research.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #28
Hi BB,
I was told (by a bait maker) that 4% of hydros is top for freebies. Some kind of damages may occur to the fish.
He didn’t explain why unfortunately.
|
|
|
|
|
With the suggested recipies it would be interesting to see the cost per kg of bait made.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #8
Hi Christian, can I ask the reasons behind getting the baits into the freezer asap?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #29
Hi Scaley,
I can only fish short day sessions, so I use paste for feed, which I try to make as instantly attractive as I can.
That's why I'm trying to make an enzyme paste.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #28
Ok BB, That makes more sense, paste potential, more than boiled baits.
Less damage to the proteins and maximum Amino acid attraction.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #26
Hi christian,
Not sure what you mean by overdoing the hydros.
Do you mean making rolling difficult?
Hi Scaley,
I only make paste bait, so I have no restriction on solubles.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #26
Thanks Christian.
What total levels of Solubles are you guys happy rolling bait with, before it won't roll well/or falls apart 2 minutes after casting out.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #21
Agreed the peptpro has a higher degree of hydrolysis but it also means that the margin for error is greater with regards quantity in the mix. I'm pretty sure I overdid the hydro products on one occasion so very wary nowadays. 5% of the whey seems about right.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #23
Should be quite an interesting thread this
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #23
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #19
Hi scaley,
Peptopro is really expensive, but NW said no cost restraint.
Also, the companies that sell these milk protein supplements are always offering discounts of 30% or even 40%. Even then, I agree, they are still expensive.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #20
Thanks for that. By the way I found it on bulkpowders, Is that where you get it from.
If anyone is interested - if you spend over £20 you get 45% off with a discount code.
500g normally would be £32.49, would then become £17.87 + P&P
So if anyone is interested that makes it a more reasonable on the pocket.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #17
Hi Christian,
Not sure that the whey hydros are better than peptopro, at least, on paper.
Peptopro has a far higher degree of hydrolysis, around 30% which produces about 80% di and tri peptides and 7-5% free AAs.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #15
Some excellent suggestions chaps, food for thought. Thank you.
And yes BB, I would also be adding enzymes, but didn't want to confuse things at this stage.
Scaley... I've used the hydrolysed Whey before up to 10% and really like it. The casein hydro/peptopro looks great but is very expensive, hydrolysed lactalbumin even more unfortunately
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #11
BB I have never used peptopro, so it has 85% protein, is a highly hydrolysed (28%) enzymatic digestion of casein, all 20 amino acids looks very good.
By that I mean Is it really worth the £49 odd per kilo price tag in our bait, even in small amounts.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #13
But as things in life progress, ingredients do improve, like Whey Protein, which years ago was considered a waste product.
But it is now most companies that are into Sport nutrition products top profit earner, and has millions spent on it.
Suddenly becomes available as Hydrolysed/pre-digested/more soluble.
Never used it, Hydrolysed Casein, Whey or Lactalbumin - but imagine it has great potential, the barbel boys seem to great excited about it in a bait, or paste.
That is - If you strike that fine balance between practical fishing bait and soluble attraction.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #11
Looking at your ingredients I think you probably get them from the same place as me. If so have a look at their acid whey, I'm really impressed with it. Like their hydolised whey as well, better than the peptpro in fact.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #12
Hi NW,
I haven't checked for FLAA, but would make sure it was covered by adjusting ingredients.
Also, you and I would be adding enzymes.
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
Acid casein - 5%
Rennet casein - 5%
Lactabumen 15%
Whey protein concentrate 80 - 6%
Whey hydrolisate - 4%
Whole milk powder (fats) - 10%
Vitamealo (vitamins&minerals and fats also) - 25%
Blue Cheese powder - 8%
Maltodextrine -7%
Lactose 3%
Nectarblend - 12%
Flavor
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #9
My Default High Protein mix would be as follows, which I would imagine wasn't too far off of Rods Protein Mix, IMHO.
20% Rennet Casein
20% Acid Casein
20% Lactalbumin
20% Calcium Caseinate
20% Soya Isolate
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #11
Loving that BB!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
Hi NW,
300 MPC
250 soya bean meal
150 semo
100 WPH
100 peptopro
100 nucleotide yeast
30 ml oil
6 citric acid
50 blood plasma
BB.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #9
I think it's a good question as I really rate milk protein in a boilie, perhaps not as the main or majority constituents but certainly at least 10%
In the past used much more, probably up to 60% but not sure the worth of that quantity any more.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #8
Hi, yep no issues with having some egg albumin in as per the purpose you mentioned.
The question is a kind of theoretical one, as I also would want fats etc, but I guess what I'm getting at, is that would it be possible to create a 'on paper' better milk protein bait, based on the easier availability (to the home roller) of hydrolysed milks and isolates, than those that were considered the best ones in days gone by (eg Rods Protein Mix, HiNuVal and MetaBait... Although the latter did contain hydro's)?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
The problem I have with your question is that I would not a 100% milk protein bait, I would always want some ingredients in to provide fat and to make it easier to roll. Also would want egg albumin in their to reduce boiling times.
It would include casein and whey protein, not that fussed over calcium caseinate. If available I would definitely have hydrolysed whey in there.
Most important to me with milk proteins is getting the bait into the freezer asap, the guy who rolls my bait understands and they are still warm from boiling when I pick them up.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #6
Not meaning any pre-packed basemixes either
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
There is 'Supermilk Gold' from John Baker - 'only designed for milk-protein fanatics', £18.99 per kilo:
https://www.johnbakerbaits.com/product/supermilk-gold/
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #3
Why useless in the summer?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #3
Think of it as more a theoretical question.... But yes, let's say it is for winter (being as it's snowing in Dorset)
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
Is it for now, winter?
Useless in summer!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
When you get an answer I'll flavour it with pineapple add a sweetener , dye it red. It will be the ultimate big roach bait. Let me know when its ready to go.
|
|
|
|
Imagine ingredient cost did not matter at all.
What would be your ultimate base mix milk protein recipe?
By that, I mean, no fishmeal, birdfood, nutmeal etc... Just a pure milk, using anything you could, including hydro milks at any level.
Not meaning any pre-packed basemixes either (Hi Nu Val or the like).
|
|
Bait