The origins of blue eyes - non-European

Here's something interesting:

Light eye allele frequencies: alfred.med.yale.edu/alfred/mvograph.asp?siteuid=SI007119S

One of the Khmer samples (SA001500G) has an astonishingly high amount of the light eye mutation. They say this is a subset of the SA000022E sample, which also shows the mutation at non-zero frequency.

Lactase persistence allele (Indoeuro variant): alfred.med.yale.edu/alfred/mvograph.asp?siteuid=SI001784U

The Khmer SA000022E sample has zero incidence.

So it seems that there are a notable group of people in Cambodia who have the light eye mutation. These people are likely NOT the result of French rapebabies, as they completely lack the lactase persistence allele.

Also, if anyone has worthwhile sources/discussion on the origins of blue eyes (like why were they so common in pre-aryan Europeans), that would be appreciated.

Khmer sample with blue eyes = size 20 and French lactase persistence allele frequency is by no means fixed. It's very much possible that they got the baquette.

blue eyes help in low light conditions, like a dense forest and (possibly) jungles. maybe that's why the khmer developed them independently of N. Europeans, whom in prehistoric times were living in extremely dense forests?

>Khmer sample with blue eyes = size 20 and French lactase persistence allele frequency is by no means fixed.

It's high enough that if there were significant intermarriage, it would be non-zero.

The only situation I can think of that would involve the french is if some french guy with blue eyes and homozygous lactose intolerance knocked up a woman, and that woman's son had a shitton of babbies.

Or, there's some sort of weird local adaptation we don't know about, like the blondeness in the Pacific and the Hmong, or the whiteness of the Kalash. If it's the latter that's pretty big.

Well, what is this then? Looks like we've got a blue eyed Fox, hmm, guess he must've evolved 15,000 years ago from a woman near the Black Sea, seeing that mutations spread like a disease through populations.

woah, this picture looks just like the gradient of your map.

That reminds me of how Papuans developed blondism completely independently of Eurasians.

Mixing an inbred savage with a European doesn't mean diversity, all it means is; the diverse European's genes are tainted with inbreeding, while the savage is just a little less inbred than before.

blimey, that's already an improvement

kek

It's a totally different genetic variation than Europeans
>>>/highschoolbiology/

It's just 20 people and the other Khmer samples don't have such frequencies. Descendants of some French guy with heterozygous (and not inherited) or missing LP allele could disproportionately affect such a small sample.

Why don't you learn about genetics before going full autist neo nazi

That has nothing to do with genes. I was just making an observation about Diversity, which was clearly the topic of my post, hence this autist () didn't lecture me about it.

And what I said was true, mixing inbred savages with tamer Europeans doesn't add Diversity to a population, it actually reduces diversity.

I personally believe most or all skin, hair and eye variations have been prevalent in homo-sapiens since our evolution as a species 200,000 years. Look at other mammals like dogs, cats , primates, bears, horses ect. They all exhibit diversity in hair and fur shades.

btw, I posted these
And advocate for mutations being caused by radical social changes.

*Eye and fur shades

Then why don't any Africans who live in the jungle (Bantus and Pygmies in Central Africa, some West Africans).

Too much UV there.

The real question is why Siberians and north Asians never developed light eyes.

Maybe the ancestral basal Eurasian split up before the mutation happened.

In that case, why didn't the mutation ever happen again in north Asia?

We know that the ancestral population of ALL Eurasians was extremely small, so if blue eyes mutated there, why did they never mutate again in north Asia, where there were population explosions easily a million times greater?

>The real question is why Siberians and north Asians never developed light eyes.
Because snow is reflective and the arctic and similar very snowy areas can be extremely bright when it is actually sunny out.

Mutations are randomly generated. A mutation has to appear in a gene pool before it's able to be selected for.

Because human evolution was multi-regional as opposed to originating in one place.

North Asians/West Siberians are mixed and have always been mixed so of course they have the blue eye gene.

Pygmies and Bantu are recent migrants. They've been in the rainforests for less than 3k years.