Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Source population data.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Figure 1.

Admixture proportion correlation versus number of AIMs in set.

Correlation between admixture proportions estimated using AIMs and proportions estimated using genome-wide data, using AIM sets of increasing size (increments of 25) for the Cape Town study group (n = 733). A proportion of the SNPs in each set of AIMs were selected using the multiple -statistic, indicated in each panel as a percentage, while the remaining SNPs were selected using the pairwise -statistic, as described in the Methods section.

More »

Figure 1 Expand

Table 2.

Correlation and RSME of 96 and 120 AIMs.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Figure 2.

Barplots of ancestry proportions estimated using genome-wide data and using AIMs.

In the first panel ancestry proportions were estimated using genome-wide data. The admixed study group (sac) is ordered by proportions of African San, African non-San, European, South Asian and East Asian ancestry. In the second panel ancestry proportions were estimated using 96 AIMs. Individuals appear in the same order as in the first panel.

More »

Figure 2 Expand

Figure 3.

Boxplots of ancestry proportions of the Cape Town study group.

Boxplots of ancestry proportions estimated using genome-wide data and proportions estimated using the panel of 96 AIMs are shown in this figure per source population, for the Cape Town study group (n = 733).

More »

Figure 3 Expand

Table 3.

Correlation for different admixed study groups.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Ancestry proportion distribution.

More »

Table 4 Expand