| Literature DB >> 29225658 |
Juan J Negro1, M Carmen Blázquez1,2, Ismael Galván1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Human populations and breeds of domestic animals are composed of individuals with a multiplicity of eye (= iris) colorations. Some wild birds and mammals may have intraspecific eye color variability, but this variation seems to be due to the developmental stage of the individual, its breeding status, and/or sexual dimorphism. In other words, eye colour tends to be a species-specific trait in wild animals, and the exceptions are species in which individuals of the same age group or gender all develop the same eye colour. Domestic animals, by definition, include bird and mammal species artificially selected by humans in the last few thousand years. Humans themselves may have acquired a diverse palette of eye colors, likewise in recent evolutionary time, in the Mesolithic or in the Upper Paleolithic. PRESENTATION OF THE HYPOTHESIS: We posit two previously unrecognized hypotheses regarding eye color variation: 1) eye coloration in wild animals of every species tends to be a fixed trait. 2) Humans and domestic animal populations, on the contrary, have eyes of multiple colors. Sexual selection has been invoked for eye color variation in humans, but this selection mode does not easily apply in domestic animals, where matings are controlled by the human breeder. TESTING THE HYPOTHESIS: Eye coloration is polygenic in humans. We wish to investigate the genetics of eye color in other animals, as well as the ecological correlates. IMPLICATIONS OF THE HYPOTHESIS: Investigating the origin and function of eye colors will shed light on the reason why some species may have either light-colored irises (e.g., white, yellow or light blue) or dark ones (dark red, brown or black). The causes behind the vast array of eye colors across taxa have never been thoroughly investigated, but it may well be that all Darwinian selection processes are at work: sexual selection in humans, artificial selection for domestic animals, and natural selection (mainly) for wild animals.Entities:
Keywords: Domestication; Eye coloration; Iris; OCA2 gene; Sexual dichromatism
Year: 2017 PMID: 29225658 PMCID: PMC5716259 DOI: 10.1186/s12983-017-0243-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Zool ISSN: 1742-9994 Impact factor: 3.172
Fig. 1Iris color varies continuously in humans from very light blue to dark brown (upper line, a, b, c, d). Intrapopulational eye color variation is also characteristic of domestic animals (middle line): two adult cats Felis catus (e, f) and two adult domestic Muscovy ducks Cairina moschata domestica (g, h). In wild animals, however, iris color tends to be a fixed trait, with few observed variations due to maturation with age or sexual dichromatism. The bottom line shows color variation in two birds of prey. First a case of variation related to age in Black-winged kites Elanus caeruleus (i: adult; j: juvenile). Second, variation related to sex: Sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus (k: adult male; l: adult female). a: CC BY-SA 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/, Luisangel https://flic.kr/p/4vHKkh). b: CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/, Gorgeous Eyes https://flic.kr/p/7vXh7G). c: CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/, Jean-Simon Asselin https://flic.kr/p/2p4pFU). d: CC BY-SA 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/, Emilio Küffer https://flic.kr/p/agQvbv). e: CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/, Trish Hamme https://flic.kr/p/dzfp8N). f: CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/, Trish Hamme https://flic.kr/p/e8v8ro). k: CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/, Andy Morffew https://flic.kr/p/KjN82N). l: CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/, sighmanb https://flic.kr/p/ecc15G
Fig. 2Phylogenetic relationships between 58 species of birds with four categories of age-related eye color changes (brown to red, brown to yellow, yellow to red and dark to light; depicted in the insert legend). The phylogenetic tree is the least-squares consensus tree calculated from the mean patristic distance matrix of a set of 1000 probable phylogenies from Jetz et al. 2012 (Nature 491: 444–448). The reconstruction of ancestral states was made by stochastic character mapping using an empirical Bayesian Monte Carlo Markov Chains (MCMC) approach (Huelsenbeck et al. 2003, Systematic Biology 52: 131–158) as implemented in phytools (Revell 2012, Methods in Ecology and Evolution 3: 217–223)