Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Ancestral component bars (Structure, Admixture, etc.)
Topic Started: Mar 21 2012, 03:15 AM (858 Views)
Master
Member Avatar
Administrator
Inference South-North admixture

Seldin et al.,

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Master
Member Avatar
Administrator
Geographical Affinities of the HapMap Samples

Miao He et al. 2009

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Master
Member Avatar
Administrator
DNA TRIBES UPGRADE 2012

dnatribes.com

Posted Image

Edited by Master, Mar 21 2012, 03:58 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Master
Member Avatar
Administrator
Rasmussen et al. 2010

Study: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v463/n7282/abs/nature08835.html


Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Master
Member Avatar
Administrator
Eurogenes HGvsF Admixture test :

Key: Red = South Asian hunter gatherer (native to South Asia - samples used included selected South Indians), Orange = Anatolian farmer (North Levant and Caucasus - selected Georgians and Abkhasians), Yellow = Middle Eastern herder (Southern Levant and Arabian peninsula - selected Saudi Arabians, Bedouins and Yemeni Jews), Light Green = American hunter gatherer (South and Central America - selected South and Central American Indians), Green = North Eurasian hunter gatherer (Siberia - selected Dolgans, Evenks, Koryaks, Nganassans, Yakuts and Yukagirs) Aqua Green = Baltic hunter gatherer (North & East European Plain - selected Lithuanians, Belorussians and Ukrainians), Light Blue = Oceanian hunter gatherer (Oceania and Southeast Asia - selected Papuans and Malenesians), Blue = Mediterranean farmer (Southern Europe, North Africa and Western Levant – selected Sardinians), Dark Purple = Far Eastern farmer (East Asia- selected Chinese samples), Light Purple = Bantu farmer (West and Central Africa – selected Yoruba), Pink = Pygmy hunter gatherer (West and South Africa – selected Pygmy and San).

Please note: First of all, it's important to understand that this is a supervised test, using small numbers of reference individuals. Therefore, it's going to be more "noisy" than an unsupervised run using genotype data from thousands of samples. It really shouldn't be shocking to see unusual admixtures of as much as 1%, or perhaps even a little more than that.


Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Master
Member Avatar
Administrator
Xing et al. 2010 :

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Master
Member Avatar
Administrator
Rasmussen et al. 2011 http://www.sciencemag.org/content/suppl/2011/09/21/science.1211177.DC1/Rasmussen.SOM.pdf

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Master
Member Avatar
Administrator
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Master
Member Avatar
Administrator
Moreno-Estrada et al. 2013 --> http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1306/1306.0558.pdf

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Master
Member Avatar
Administrator
Lazaridis et al. :

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Autosomal DNA · Next Topic »
Add Reply