Percentage of light eyes in LATAM?

[G.Tucker]

Argentina = 27% light eyes
Brasil = 21%
Chile = 16%
Costa Rica = 10%

Source: https://i.4pcdn.org/pol/1432149905370.png

[Thetruth]

Totally crap map. Mexico as the same of Argentina and Southern Iberia? Brazil the same as other latam countries?
To start with, any map with Mexico lighter than CR is wrong, to my eyes CR is more white than any mexican state or at least on pair with the whitest state, imagine the country.

Sounds about right, Reyzuh should be a comedian for that comment alone. Only Northern Mexicans regions from what I’ve seen reach high levels of European ancestry but now where close to Argentina or Uruguay’s range !

[samario]

Maternal grandmother = blue eyes.
Mother = sort of hazel.
Half sibling on my mother's side = green/blue mix.
Me = brown/light brown depending on the lighting but always with a special sparkle.

[BirdMan]

This is some interesting data from ancestryDNA that might be helpful.

Here are the eye colors of their users with dna ancestry from Spain and Portugal.

Most users with DNA ancestry from those countries are Latin American. Some are users with Spanish/Portuguese DNA ancestry are obviously Iberians or White Americans with some Iberian ancestry, but I think like 80+% are of Latin American descent.

I think these numbers provide an interesting data point.

[Daven]

This is some interesting data from ancestryDNA that might be helpful.

Here are the eye colors of their users with dna ancestry from Spain and Portugal.

Most users with DNA ancestry from those countries are Latin American. Some are users with Spanish/Portuguese DNA ancestry are obviously Iberians or White Americans with some Iberian ancestry, but I think like 80+% are of Latin American descent.

25% of Iberians have them like I had in mind. Spot on as usual.

[samario]

Do black eyes even exist?

[Daven]

Tiene usted toda la razón. Costa Rica no es como el Centro-Norte de México, en todos los videos de las ciudades centrales de Guanajuato, Nuevo León, Baja California, Hidalgo y principalmente Coahuila, Tamaulipas y San Luis Potosí, se ven muchos más indomestizos que en Costa Rica (muchos más, no solo un poco más, muuuuchos más) y menos harnizos-castizos, sobretodo los tres últimos tres estados que mencioné, aún cuando nuestras ciudades están invadidos por nicas.

El noreste de México es menos claro que el noroeste. En el centro-oeste de México hay áreas que no son tan claras. Las cosas varían entre las mismas regiones. Se puede hablar de un promedio solamente. Yo también me imagino que los videos no son 100% confiables todas las veces.

[Daven]

Nobody is in condition to judge others here.
99% of the users (included me) don't know about the majority of countries of LA.
The most go by stereotypes.

This my friend, this.

[Not a Cop]

This is some interesting data from ancestryDNA that might be helpful.

Here are the eye colors of their users with dna ancestry from Spain and Portugal.

Most users with DNA ancestry from those countries are Latin American. Some are users with Spanish/Portuguese DNA ancestry are obviously Iberians or White Americans with some Iberian ancestry, but I think like 80+% are of Latin American descent.

I think these numbers provide an interesting data point.

Is there statistics for other regions?

[Daven]

Lower, much lower.

I exactly don´t know how many mixed people have or can have light eyes. We must have to take into account many perspectives (the degree of european admixture; the provenience of that european admixture; the degree of maintenance of light eyes in mixed people because it´s a reccesive genetic trait, more reccesive when the admixture is black than amerindian).

But in many countries, like for example Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, Panama, Honduras, Guatemala, Dominican Republic, southern half of Mexico, I doubt that light eyes are more than a 3%.

And that´s a bunch of population.

For instance Argentina, half of their population is mostly european (+85% euro admixture), if we suppose that this population is 40% italian - 50% spanish (spanish is higher because the colonials "criollos de vuelta") - 10% northern european; and taking into account that presence of light eyes in native populations is 26% for Spain, 30% for Italy, and 70% for northern Europe.

I based myself on this map, for instance:




Making simple mathematics:

70% of the 10% of the 50% ---- 3,5% of the total population of Argentina
26% of the 50% of the 50% --- 6,5%
30% of the 40% of the 50% --- 6%

This is a favorable scenario, some of them would have lost light eyes by their minor amerindian imput.

Then, if we suppose than the other half of the population, with visible amerindian features, maintain half of the light eyes of their european provenience (mostly spanish). We obtain:

13% of the 50% --- 6,5%

The population of Argentina with light eyes could be a 22,5%.

And that´s the country with more light eyes after Uruguay (but Uruguay has a very small population in Latin American context).

The rest of Latin American countries can hardly reach 10% in any case (Brasil, Chile and Cuba mainly).

Light eyes in Latin America are less than 10%, something between 5 and 10%.

This is biased bs. Light eyes aren't more recessive among mulattoes than among mestizos. If anything it seems the only way around going by eyeballing itself. Unless you have something to back this claim up? LMAO. I personally could have thought they were both about the same but in my experience it's easier to find pred. SSAs with light eyes than pred. natives. You just have to compared anglo-mestizos with anglo-griffes and biracials to see I'm saying. I remind you that I live in the most diverse city in the planet btw.