Quote:
Originally Posted by bioblitzkrieg
being that blue eyes range from Iceland to Israel, Its kind of hard to imagine a single person's mutation within the past 6-10 thousands years spreading so fast and being present in such a huge geographic swath, isnt it possible that the same or similar mutation occured in different individuals, who were enduring the same environmental conditions? It would be like saying all light skinned people share a common ancestor that endowed them with that trait, yet in reality we know that this occured not through a single person's contribution, but through a population's collective adaptation to the environment and overall UV index.
|
I believe so. Something that would contradict that and be in favor of a neolithic scenario of origin, would be if we could trace a high amount of neolithic input from the Black Sea region to Northern Scandinavia in the modern population through haplogroup distribution of the sex chromosomes. This does not correlate with the comparative level of blue eyes of Denmark and South Western Norway, and the levels of UP continuity, from maternal haplogroup H (from UP HV) and paternal R1b, but again, the most blue eyed regions of Scandinavia are in Sweden and Finland. The neolithic input is correlated with mtDNA haplogroup J/T, particularly high in frequency in the British Isles, Southern Scandinavia, Portugal, Italy and Greece, and theoretically R1a in the Y chromosome. But even where the rates of neolithic input are higher in Western Europe, they are at moderate to low levels, and the distribution of the haplogroups dont seem to correlate with eye color.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truth-Finder
What I disagree about this article is specially the date at which the mutation took place; it says 6-10 000 Years BP but am pretty sure they were there before that and are probably older than the RH+ split into RH- rhesus
|
Actually, it says 6,000-10,000 years ago, so the earliest period they are calculating with is 8000 BP.