Category Archives: Admixture - Page 10

Reference 3 Admixture K=8

Continuing with the admixture analysis with our new reference 3 dataset.

Here's the results spreadsheet for K=8.

You can click on the legend to the right of the bar chart to sort by different ancestral components.

Fst divergences between estimated populations for K=8 in the form of an MDS plot.

And the numbers:
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7
C2 0.098
C3 0.073 0.139
C4 0.090 0.152 0.065
C5 0.184 0.201 0.220 0.231
C6 0.113 0.068 0.147 0.166 0.223
C7 0.164 0.208 0.180 0.170 0.273 0.227
C8 0.158 0.139 0.181 0.212 0.285 0.143 0.275

Reference 3 Admixture K=7

Continuing with the admixture analysis with our new reference 3 dataset.

Here's the results spreadsheet for K=7.

You can click on the legend to the right of the bar chart to sort by different ancestral components.

Fst divergences between estimated populations for K=7 in the form of an MDS plot.

And the numbers:
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6
C2 0.099
C3 0.102 0.150
C4 0.083 0.139 0.062
C5 0.117 0.069 0.164 0.146
C6 0.168 0.208 0.171 0.179 0.227
C7 0.161 0.140 0.209 0.181 0.143 0.274

Reference 3 Admixture K=6

Continuing with the admixture analysis with our new reference 3 dataset.

Here's the results spreadsheet for K=6.

You can click on the legend to the right of the bar chart to sort by different ancestral components.

Fst divergences between estimated populations for K=6 in the form of MDS plots.

And the numbers:
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5
C2 0.088
C3 0.085 0.132
C4 0.097 0.145 0.067
C5 0.165 0.203 0.182 0.171
C6 0.154 0.128 0.176 0.205 0.269

Reference 3 Admixture K=5

UPDATE: With fixed Reference 3.

Continuing with the admixture analysis with our new reference 3 dataset.

Here's the results spreadsheet for K=5.

You can click on the legend to the right of the bar chart to sort by different ancestral components.

Fst divergences between estimated populations for K=5 in the form of MDS plots.

And the numbers:
C1 C2 C3 C4
C2 0.078
C3 0.088 0.126
C4 0.153 0.176 0.127
C5 0.160 0.165 0.201 0.266

Reference 3 Admixture K=4

UPDATE: With fixed Reference 3.

Continuing with the admixture analysis with our new reference 3 dataset.

Here's the results spreadsheet for K=4.

You can click on the legend to the right of the bar chart to sort by different ancestral components.

I have implemented something in this bar chart. When you click on the legend to sort by a specific component, it filters the results so that only those populations with at least 5% of that component are shown. Let me know what you think about this.

Fst divergences between estimated populations for K=4 in the form of an MDS plot.

And the numbers:
C1 C2 C3
C2 0.120
C3 0.158 0.198
C4 0.168 0.124 0.267

Reference 3 Admixture K=3

UPDATE: With fixed Reference 3.

Let's start with some admixture analysis with our new reference 3 dataset. We already did K=2 admixture run.

Here's the results spreadsheet for K=3.

You can click on the legend to the right of the bar chart to sort by different ancestral components.

Fst divergences between estimated populations for K=3 in the form of an MDS plot.

And the numbers:
C1 C2
C2 0.114
C3 0.157 0.197

Reference 3 Admixture K=2

UPDATE: With fixed Reference 3.

Let's start with some admixture analysis with our new reference 3 dataset.

Here's the results spreadsheet for K=2 (i.e. two ancestral populations).

You can click on the legend to the right of the bar chart to sort by different ancestral components.

Fst divergences between estimated populations for K=2:
C1
C2 0.168

With the increase in the number of groups to more than 160, the bar chart has gotten too busy and is hard to figure out. Any suggestions to improve its readability? I have two ideas: One is to have a dropdown menu to select regions and thus have separate charts for each region. The other, which I like better, is to show only the top 50 groups for the ancestral component you are sorting by. Any other ideas are welcome.

Behar Paniya

Behar as in the Behar et al paper/dataset and not the Indian state of Bihar. The Behar dataset contains 4 samples of Paniya, which apparently is a Dravidian language of some Scheduled Tribes in Kerala.

I had always been suspicious of those four samples since one of them had admixture proportions similar to other South Indians but the other three were like Southeast Asians.

When I got the Austroasiatic dataset, I found out that they had the four Paniyas from Behar et al in their data. However, only one of those four was the same as Behar. The other three were different. So I now had 7 Paniya samples.

Let's look at the K=12 admixture results for these Paniyas.

Behar's GSM536916 was the one which was the same as Austroasiatic's D36 and it has regular South Indian results. The other three Behar Paniyas are very Southeast Asian (yellow in the plot) while the three Paniyas from Austroasiatic data are similar to GSM536916/D36.

Since the Austroasiatic Paniya samples originated from Behar et al, I guess at some point before the Behar data being submitted to the GEO database the Paniyas got mislabeled.

I am now excluding the four Paniyas from Behar et al dataset and only using the Paniya samples from Austroasiatic dataset.

Reference 3 Admixture

I have withdrawn the Admixture results for Reference 3 for now while I figure out why a few of them were weird and unstable.Далматин

I will report back on what I find and will have fixed results soon.

Harappa Admixture Dendrogram 1-80

It's time to update the Harappa admixture dendrogram since the last time I created one we had only 40 participants.

Note that this is not a phylogeny. It just visualizes the closeness of your admixture results to others.

Also note that I am using Euclidean distance between admixture proportions which has problems and using complete linkage hierarchical clustering.