DNAprint Genomics (DNAG)

[dgplexus]

If blue eyes are caused by a knockout mutation (in a gene that is critical to the formation of the brown pigmentation in brown-eyed persons,) then I would agree with Dr. Frudakis, that it likely arose several times independently. Knockout mutations are relatively very common, and can occur independently, surprisingly often. As a sometimes-avid aquarist (currently inactive in the hobby,) I've seen such mutations occur in my own fish and snails, multiple times. When a snail has such a knockout mutation, for shell color, the underlying body color shows through the translucent shell (in the case of snails with translucent shells, anyway.) In the case of Planorbis planorbis (a type of "ramshorn" snail common in the aquarium industry, usually brown-shelled, and red-bodied through selection,) this gives them a purplish-blue look, with a bit of green, the color varying by oxygenation levels, etc. (Their blood is colored not only by red-blue hemoglobin, but by a copper-based oxygen transport system, as well.) Anyway, if everyone with blue eyes has exactly the *same* mutation that has disabled exactly the *same* gene, then it's possible it all stems from a single mutation event. Though dating it precisely could prove to be difficult.

Copy number variation in the human genome, and other factors, have recently cast a whole lot of doubt on a whole lot of such datings, usually causing upward revisions in LCA (last common ancestor) dates, we're seeing revisions roughly from 70,000 to 100,000 years ago (older, "Out of Africa" estimates,) to 500,000 - 700,000, 1 million, and estimates as high as 8 million years old, or even indefinite/indeterminate (in excess of 20 million years, perhaps, which would be a scenario of extremely long-term multiregional evolution.) With what we're currently seeing in other species, I personally think 2 million years, to indefinite/indeterminate (20 or 30 million years, perhaps more,) is likely. But I'm not in the mainstream on this. The mainstream appears to be moving in a direction convergent with my views, which is encouraging for me, of course. I can't take credit for most of this stuff, as there are many "multiregionalists" who have preceded me. I stand on the shoulders of giants, as always.

P.S., the Lacandon tribe if Maya (Mayan) people, should be investigated. Reportedly, they've recently had independent mutations for things like blue eyes, and even albinism (or at least much lighter skin.) Some attribute this to genetic problems due to inbreeding, but I'm not so sure it's as clear-cut as that. Another possibility is that they have, contrary to their religious taboos, interbred with Caucasian outsiders. Genetic tests should be able to detect that, if it has occurred.

Related search link:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=lacandon+albinism

Albinism is another type of knockout change, not necessarily identical in every case, and not, to my knowledge, stemming from a single mutation event.

Another intriguing thing about the Maya peoples; reportedly, some of their distinctive genetic markers have been detected, yet not explained, in Greek populations. This detection occurred long after speculation of a possible connection between the two ancient groups. I was recently in a private Maya museum in Yucatan, run by a Maya man, and one of his books, in Spanish, deals with the subject of similarities and apparent connections between the two. My guess is, maybe some Mayas made it to Greece, long before Columbus. Just a guess. They did have boats, after all, and the first recorded sighting of Maya people by Europeans, was of Mayas in trading boats, in the Caribbean sea. I apologize for the digression, but I think it's related to AncestryByDNA.