We shouldn't get too carried away with the flavours produced by the food flavour industry and how we perceive them relative to the ability to attract carp etc.

Volatile odourant chemicals are used to produce food flavours there are also many other chemical combinations used to enhance, complement , or otherwise adjust the overall taste perception.

But critically these flavours etc were not developed for the aqueous world or the chemoreception processes of the carp or other fish

Many bait companies worldwide now have/ access to, the knowledge and facilities to put together a flavour/attractant specifically designed for carp or other fish.
They are based on validated known attractants selected for process friendly, balanced leakage rates and synergistic action.
Quite often neutral “masking”chemicals may also be added to confer an odour that can be recognised by us humans.
I know of several UK bait companies who have formulated their own flavours /attractants

In reply to Post #14
The Worldwide aquafeed industry value is around 65 billion dollars, around 30 % of that figure is associated with carp , the highest percentage relative to species.

The use of enzymes/ amino acids is one of the main areas of interest

The research and development budgets are substantial

In reply to Post #13
Your spot on there regarding the constituents that have the potential to attract carp and raw honey straight from the hive is best.
Processing of the honey for large scale commercial supply , no matter how slight, always has the potential to reduce the effectiveness of the enzymes, etc.,
The free amino acids range will vary depending on where the bees are collecting pollen from so if you are using it from a specific area you will get consistency of results.

We compared the analysis of over 30 Spanish honeys with the manuka honey , the content was similar in terms of simple sugars, enzymes and free amino acids ( although there was a slight difference in range amongst all the honeys) and some beneficial bacteria strains were also present. As smurf said the big selling point with manuka is the relatively high content of certain antibacterials and its characteristic taste.

Taking into account the high price differential, and some comparative testing we carried out, there is nothing really that I can see that would give any great advantage over raw unpasteurised honey straight from the hive in terms of a fishing bait used for carp,
I realise that others will have a different view ; but at the end of the day it's a personal choice and carrying out some trials as you did would be the way to go.

In reply to Post #42
Yes a good approach, however bear in mind an overload of a particular chemical can also interfere with the “ attractive ability/efficiency “ of other chemicals within the mix.

In reply to Post #35
The question I was asked referred specifically to high concentrations of “sweeteners “ in bait.

If the “ saturation” point of a given chemoreceptor is exceeded then the receptor generally will “switch off”.
In the carp's natural food environment this is unlikely to happen, where the food source, at a given point in time , is “ man made” and certain chemicals/substances have been overloaded, then yes this can happen.
I have seen this occur in quite a few instances where boilie formulations are being evaluated.

You do not really want to have chemicals/substances at a concentration in bait/boilie formulations that can cause this to happen.

In reply to Post #27
Depends on the “sweetener;” but yes there is that possibility, more likely that any receptors involved will be “ overloaded” and the carp will “switch off” .
More is not always best

In reply to Post #21

The aquaculture feed industry has looked at flavours as used by carp anglers; but could not see any significant advantages in their use as compared to their standard formulations.

In reply to Post #22
No one said Betaine does not attract carp.Betaine is trimethylglycine and it is its structural similarity to the amino acid glycine that generates or enhances the “attractive” response by carp not its “sweetness” as perceived by humans.

Several other amino acids are perceived to be sweet by human taste: but it is not this property that attracts carp, it is the binding of these amino acids to the amino acid receptors that generate the “attraction “ response.

In reply to Post #1
In that podcast John Baker clearly said that sweeteners were not necessary/needed in baits.
Examples he quoted as being “ sweeteners” were talin, saccharine, fructose, dextrose and maltose, both synthetic sweeteners and sugars quoted here.
The only”sweet” additive he recommended was honey at a low level of 1/3rd of a teaspoon per 6 eggs .
The suggestion was that the attractive ability of honey was the content and complexity of the various aroma chemicals it contained .
He also made the point that if “ sweeteners” were effective attractors then they would be included in commercial fish feed pellets, and they are not.

In reply to Post #27
Agree with you completely Ken. Any “ long fermented” vegetable matter such as maize, hemp, etc has the potential to produce chemicals that can act as repellents.
I have been involved with problems caused by “ long fermented “ vegetable matter both in boilie formulations and with the use of it in medium sized commercial day ticket lakes,