Skip to main content

Table 6 Percent polar bear for each brown bear in this study, calculated via \( \widehat{f} \), AD-LIBS, and HAPMIX, if available

From: AD-LIBS: inferring ancestry across hybrid genomes using low-coverage sequence data

Bear Origin \( \widehat{f} \) AD-LIBS AD-LIBS conservative HAPMIX
ABC01 Baranof Island, AK 8.63% 18.6% 15.5% 14.4%
ABC02 Baranof Island, AK 8.87% 18.8% 15.7% 14.8%
ABC03 Chichagof Island, AK 9.63% 19.4% 16.2% N/A
ABC04 Chichagof Island, AK 9.03% 19.0% 15.8% N/A
ABC05 Chichagof Island, AK 8.93% 19.1% 15.9% N/A
ABC06 Admiralty Island, AK 6.56% 17.1% 14.2% N/A
Adm1 Admiralty Island, AK 6.12% 16.6% 13.8% N/A
Adm2 Admirality Island, AK 6.05% 17.0% 14.2% 12.6%
Bar Baranof Island, AK 8.14% 18.5% 15.4% 14.3%
Chi1 Chichagof Island, AK 8.57% 18.6% 15.5% N/A
Chi2 Chichagof Island, AK 8.69% 18.7% 15.6% N/A
Den Denali Natl. Park, AK 7.02% 14.5% 11.9% N/A
GP01 Glacier Park, Montana 4.37% 17.2% 14.3% N/A
GRZ Kenai Peninsula, AK 3.30% 13.0% 10.7% N/A
OFS01 Östanvik, Sweden 0.464% 5.35% 4.41% N/A
RF01 Ruokolahti, Finland 0.319% 6.90% 5.67% N/A
SJS01 Slakka, Sweden 0.211% 5.27% 4.33% N/A
Swe Dalarna, Sweden 0%* 4.89% 4.02% N/A
  1. The asterisk indicates that Swe was used as a model unadmixed brown bear in \( \widehat{f} \) calculations, making polar bear ancestry undetectable. HAPMIX was only run on the four ABC Islands brown bears with minimum 20X coverage, to ensure that heterozygous variant calls were reliable. The “AD-LIBS conservative” column shows AD-LIBS estimates corrected according to the percent of homozygous and heterozygous polar bear ancestry calls that were incorrect in simulations under the single-pulse model (Table 1)