Skip to main content
. 2017 Feb 20;27(4):576–582. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2016.12.060

Figure 2.

Figure 2

PCA and ADMIXTURE Analysis for Ancient Latvian and Ukrainian Samples

(A) Ancient data presented in this study as well as published ancient data (see Data S1 for sample details) were projected onto the first two principal components defined by selected modern Eurasians from the Human Origins dataset (see the Supplemental Experimental Procedures). Our Latvian Mesolithic samples cluster tightly together between western and eastern hunter-gatherers in PCA space, whereas the Latvian Neolithic samples are more variable in their position, suggesting impacts from exogenous populations. The Ukrainian Mesolithic and Neolithic samples fall close together between western and eastern hunter-gatherers, suggesting a degree of continuity across the Mesolithic-Neolithic boundary in this region.

(B) ADMIXTURE ancestry components (K = 17) [25] for ancient samples showing that the Latvian Neolithic samples do not have the yellow component that dominates in Anatolian and early European farmers. The Latvian and Ukrainian samples presented in this study are displayed in a gray box and at twice the height of the other ancient samples for ease of visualization. The arrow shows an Estonian Bronze Age sample (RISE00) [26] that has a yellow component, suggesting that an early European farmer genetic influence had arrived in the Baltic by the Bronze Age.

HG, hunter-gatherer; BA, Bronze Age; W, western; C, Central. See also Figures S1–S4.