Quote:
Originally Posted by oubiña
In genetic terms, this artical simply means that the one mutaton that leads to blue eyes in humans has no locus or allelic heterogeneity. You can imply by that (and other factors) the mutaton occured in only one person in the past and then spread to some human popultions. Probably there was selection.
|
We have many examples of amorphic and hypomorphic mutations in the melanic system towards depigmentation outside of Europe, including albinism, and several mechanisms by which blue eyes can be achieved. There is enough reason to believe that blue eyes have emerged independently of each other many times. However, it is a polygenic trait, and we cannot simplify it to one mutation. The study indicates that this specific mutation is only related to blue eyes that have
no brown/green/hazel components
at all, and most people referred to as blue eyed have some sort of hazel variant (with brown spots, however visible) which is an impurity (in relation to this Black Sea mutation), and thus their variant likely derives from a mixture of dark and light eyes, or just a completely other mutation.
On another note,
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by http://www.springerlink.com/content/2045q6234h66p744/fulltext.html
The mutations responsible for the blue eye color most likely originate from the neareast area or northwest part of the Black Sea region, where the great agriculture migration to the northern part of Europe took place in the Neolithic periods about 6–10,000 years ago (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994). |
This seems to confirm my Indo-European speculations by geographic proximity. But indeed they are nothing more than speculations.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Earlier post
Assuming there really is a single origin for this blue eyed mutation, it must have been in the early Indo-Europeans, or something, because otherwise I cant see how this gene could have been spread so much. That would explain how its been breed into every single lineage in existence, in a limited occurrence, virtually.
|