concerning pigmentation, I foind very counterintuitive these publications about ancient people -
linking a phenotype, with gradual effects like pigmentation, to genotype is a sport!!! unprecise phenotypes assignations explained by very precise genotypings is a bit confusing for me -
It's hard to me to imagine old "Europeans" living in cold climate for 40000 or 30000 for some of them, having a dark complexion and hairs - at least I believe it was already not a completely dark complexion -
many factors are confusing: the today evident links between, NOT RUFOSITY, but rather between ligh pigmentation in eyes and hairs - the fact these traits are common among North/Northeastern populations the ones which show the more of "hunter-gatherer" autosomals -
I repeat the major mutation affecting skin colour among Europoids (Caucasoids) is not the only one, and it is almost independant from the eye/hair colour or poorly lonked to it -but we find other correlations: a set of traits linking LIGHTER SKIN to LIGH HAIR AND LIGHT EYES + a set of traits linking VERY LIGHTER SKIN to VERY LIGHTER HAIR AND VERY LIGHTER EYES - these 2 last "kits" of depigmentation don't seem to me linked to neolithical agriculture nor southeastern caspian populations -
the 2 blondisms associated to 2 kinds of eyes colour and of skin colour (without speaking about vascularization, different in each case) ask for some answers -
can we figure out a first mutation (not already identified) affecting HGs linking skin/eye/hair (very slight lightening for skin): brownish skin, middle brown hair, dark green eyes?
and a later mutation on a close segment of DNA with some effect: the 2 having a cumulative effect:
this late mutation could produce dark blond upon blackish background and light blond upon brownish background.? it only a school hypothesis but a think a cumulative effect of different mutations upon pigmentation is to imagine to explain the current situation -by the way, the more HG population in Europe are the one with NOT THE MORE OFTEN LIGHT PIGMENTATION as a whole BUT WITH THE LESS RARE VERY LIGHT PIGMENTATION (Finnland, Balts, Estonians, Czechs, Poles, Russians, Belarussians...
maybe its more complicated yet? I think some of the ligtening mutations became common in the Russian Steppes, affecting almost all the Europeans later, by Indo-European impact - the lighter hues obtained only when the HG factors were present... Just a bet -
the principal skin mutation had already touched Neolithical people even in Near Eastern and, far more specific to skin and far more effective in decoloration, gained ground all over Europe with mixing, with possible positive effects upon vitamin D fixation??? (here I'm on a foreign ground to me)