Skip to main content
NCBI home page
eLife logoLink to eLife
. 2023 Sep 28;12:e87513. doi: 10.7554/eLife.87513

Adulis and the transshipment of baboons during classical antiquity

Franziska Grathwol 1, Christian Roos 2, Dietmar Zinner 3,4,5, Benjamin Hume 1,6, Stéphanie M Porcier 7, Didier Berthet 8, Jacques Cuisin 9, Stefan Merker 10, Claudio Ottoni 11, Wim Van Neer 12,13, Nathaniel J Dominy 14,15, Gisela H Kopp 1,15,16,17,✉
Editors: Ammie K Kalan18, Christian Rutz19
PMCID: PMC10597581  PMID: 37767965

Abstract

Adulis, located on the Red Sea coast in present-day Eritrea, was a bustling trading centre between the first and seventh centuries CE. Several classical geographers—Agatharchides of Cnidus, Pliny the Elder, Strabo—noted the value of Adulis to Greco-Roman Egypt, particularly as an emporium for living animals, including baboons (Papio spp.). Though fragmentary, these accounts predict the Adulite origins of mummified baboons in Ptolemaic catacombs, while inviting questions on the geoprovenance of older (Late Period) baboons recovered from Gabbanat el-Qurud (‘Valley of the Monkeys’), Egypt. Dated to ca. 800–540 BCE, these animals could extend the antiquity of Egyptian–Adulite trade by as much as five centuries. Previously, Dominy et al. (2020) used stable isotope analysis to show that two New Kingdom specimens of Papio hamadryas originate from the Horn of Africa. Here, we report the complete mitochondrial genomes from a mummified baboon from Gabbanat el-Qurud and 14 museum specimens with known provenance together with published georeferenced mitochondrial sequence data. Phylogenetic assignment connects the mummified baboon to modern populations of P. hamadryas in Eritrea, Ethiopia, and eastern Sudan. This result, assuming geographical stability of phylogenetic clades, corroborates Greco-Roman historiographies by pointing toward present-day Eritrea, and by extension Adulis, as a source of baboons for Late Period Egyptians. It also establishes geographic continuity with baboons from the fabled Land of Punt (Dominy et al., 2020), giving weight to speculation that Punt and Adulis were essentially the same trading centres separated by a thousand years of history.

Research organism: Other

Introduction

Adulis, on the coast of present-day Eritrea, was an important hub during the rise of cross-ocean maritime trade, connecting ships, cargoes, and ideas from Egypt, Arabia, and India (Burstein, 2002; Munro-Hay, 1982; Seland, 2008). Trade peaked between the fourth and seventh centuries CE, propelling the rise and expansion of the Aksumite kingdom, but its occupation history extends, at minimum, to the first millennium BCE (Zazzaro et al., 2014). Corroborating this archaeological record are written accounts that draw attention to the importance of Adulis as one of the foremost sources of African animals or animal products during the Hellenistic period (323–31 BCE). In Topographia Christiana, a sixth-century text, the Nestorian merchant Cosmas Indicopleustes recounts his own visit to Adulis in 518 CE (Fauvelle-Aymar, 2009; Hatke, 2013). There he copied the text of a stele inscribed in Greek and known today as the Monumentum Adulitanum I. The text celebrates the military conquests of Ptolemy III Euergetes (reign: 246–222 BCE) and notes the local availability of war elephants for himself and his predecessor, Ptolemy II Philadelphus (reign: 284–246 BCE) (Bowersock, 2013).

Echoing this account is the first-century Periplus Maris Erythraei, an anonymous text focused on maritime trade across the Red Sea Basin: ‘practically the whole number of elephants and rhinoceros that are killed live in the places inland, although at rare intervals they are hunted on the seacoast even near Adulis’ (Casson, 1989; Casson, 1993). Pliny the Elder described Adulis as a thriving emporium in his Naturalis Historia, another first-century text, and commented on the availability of ivory, rhinoceros horn, hippopotamus hides, tortoise shell, and sphingia—or ‘sphinx monkeys,’ a term that probably refers to the gelada, Theropithecus gelada (Jolly and Ucko, 1969). Pliny’s account relied heavily on the writings of Agatharchides of Cnidus (ca. 145 BCE), who described ‘Aithiopia’ (meaning the Red Sea coast and African hinterlands) as a source of sphinx monkeys, cepi (probably patas monkeys, Erythrocebus patas; Burstein, 1989), and cynocephali—or ‘dog-heads.’ Strabo’s Geographica references the worship of cynocephali at Hermopolis (Egypt), making it clear that the animal in question is the hamadryas baboon (Papio hamadryas), the traditional sacred animal of the Egyptian god Thoth (Figure 1). The source of baboons in ancient Egypt is an enduring question (Dominy et al., 2020) as the current distribution of baboons excludes Egypt (Figure 2) and there is no prehistoric evidence of baboons occurring in Egypt naturally (Geraads, 1987).

Figure 1. Strabo’s reference (17.1.40) to the worship of cynocephali at Hermopolis Magna makes clear that the animal in question is the hamadryas baboon (Papio hamadryas).

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

The sanctuary and temple complex featured several 35-tonne statues of P. hamadryas as the embodiment of Thoth. One of the oldest deities in the Egyptian pantheon, Thoth is best known as a god of writing and wisdom, a lunar deity, and vizier of the gods, but also as a cosmic deity, creator god, and warrior (Stadler, 2012). The quartzite statues were erected by Amenhotep III, 18th Dynasty, New Kingdom, 1390–1353 BCE. Photograph by N.J. Dominy.

Figure 2. Present-day distributions of the six baboon species, major mitochondrial clades, and provenance of samples analysed in this study.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

(a) Overview of species distributions according to the IUCN (2020) and coloured by species (red: P. papio; brown: P. ursinus; yellow: P. cynocephalus; orange: P. kindae; green: P. anubis; purple: P. hamadryas). Colour-patterned regions reflect main mitochondrial clade attribution resulting from phylogenetic reconstructions and are denoted with capital letters A–K (Figure 8). Squares and circles represent geoprovenance of mitogenomes and partial mtDNA datasets (e.g. D-loop, cytochrome b), respectively, and are coloured by species. Note that introgressive hybridization has led to discordances between species assignment and mitochondrial clades. (b) Detailed view of the distribution of mitochondrial subclades G3-X, G3-Y, and G3-Z in the northeastern distribution of baboons. Samples attributed to G3-Y, the subclade assigned to the mummified baboon in phylogenetic reconstructions and haplotype networks, are highlighted with asterisks. The locations of the excavation site of the mummified baboon, Gabbanat el-Qurud, and Adulis are marked with magenta triangles. Male baboon drawings by Stephen Nash, used with permission.

Though fragmentary, this historiography points to Adulis as a commercial source of mummified baboons in Ptolemaic catacombs, such as those at Saqqara and Tuna el-Gebel (Goudsmit and Brandon-Jones, 1999; Peters, 2020) [or those of their progenitors if Ptolemaic Egyptians maintained captive breeding programs; (von den Driesch et al., 2004)]. At the same time, these accounts invite questions focused on the source of pre-Ptolemaic baboons recovered from Gabbanat el-Qurud, Egypt (Lortet and Gaillard, 1907) and dated to ca. 800–540 BCE (Richardin et al., 2017), a span that corresponds to the 25th Dynasty and Late Period of Egyptian antiquity. If these older specimens can be traced to Eritrea, and by extension Adulis, then they have the potential to extend the time depth of Egyptian–Adulite trade by as much as five centuries.

Mummified baboons have been investigated morphologically, revealing species-level taxonomic assignments as well as individual details, such as age, sex, and pathological condition (Boessneck, 1987; Brandon-Jones and Goudsmit, 2022; Goudsmit and Brandon-Jones, 1999; Peters, 2020). Such data are telling, but insufficient for determining fine-scale geographic origins. Recent oxygen and strontium stable isotope evidence suggests that mummified hamadryas baboons were imported from a region encompassing northern Somalia, Eritrea, and Ethiopia (Dominy et al., 2020), a level of geographic precision with limited practical value. Another limitation concerns the captive breeding of some animals. For instance, stable isotopes can reveal a lifetime in Egypt but not the geoprovenance of the source population, as shown for olive baboons from the Ptolemaic catacombs of North Saqqara (Dominy et al., 2020). The analysis of ancient DNA (aDNA) recovered from baboon mummies and compared to the current distribution of baboon genetic diversity has the potential to provide more detailed insights on the geographic origin of baboons in ancient Egypt. To explore this possibility, we sequenced the mitochondrial genome (mitogenome) of a mummified baboon to infer its geographic origin through phylogenetic assignment.

Gabbanat el-Qurud

In Topography of Thebes, Wilkinson, 1853 noted a site called Gabbanat el-Qurud (‘Valley of the Monkeys’) located ca. 2.5 km north–northwest of Medinet Habu, the mortuary temple of Ramses III. Intrigued by this observation, French Egyptologists Louis Lortet and Claude Gaillard sought and found the site in February 1905, along with the remains of mummified baboons. They recovered ‘17 skulls and a large quantity of bones,’ which they attributed to Papio anubis and P. hamadryas (Lortet and Gaillard, 1907). The assemblage includes juvenile and adult males and females buried in jars, sarcophagi, or wooden coffins. Now accessioned in the Musée des Confluences, Lyon, France, the linen wrapping of one mummified individual (MHNL 90001206) was dated radiometrically to 803–544 cal. BC (95.4%) (Richardin et al., 2017).

Ottoni et al., 2019 sampled dental calculus from 16 individuals in this same assemblage and reported the preservation of ancient microbial DNA in a subset of six. Their success motivated us to extract DNA from the remaining tooth material of ten individuals (Table 1, Supplementary file 1). In addition, we obtained samples (skin, bone, or tooth) from 21 modern historic specimens of baboons available in museum collections and representing the northeast African distribution of Papio (Table 1, Figure 2). These specimens were collected between 1855 and 1978, and we denote them ‘historic samples’ in the remainder of the article to distinguish them both from the older mummified specimens (‘mummified samples’) and recently collected material (‘modern samples’). Latitude–longitude information on the origin of the specimens was either derived from the respective museum database or assigned based on the listed provenance (Table 1).

Table 1. Information on samples analysed in this study.

Taxon Origin Museum ID Country Latitude Longitude MitoClade AccNo Reference
P. hamadryas MNHN MO-1972–357 ETH 9.320 42.119 G3-X OQ538080 This study
P. hamadryas SMNS SMNS-Z-MAM-001034* ETH 11.500 39.300 G3-X OQ538076 This study
P. hamadryas MfN ZMB_Mam_025647_(2) ETH 14.164 38.891 G3-X OQ538079 This study
P. hamadryas SMNS SMNS-Z-MAM-000960 ERI 15.783 38.453 G3-X OQ538078 This study
P. hamadryas NHMUK ZD.1910.10.3.1 SOM 9.933 45.200 G3-X MT279063 Roos et al., 2021
P. hamadryas MfN ZMB_Mam_012808 ETH 9.314 42.118 G3-X OQ538089 this study
P. anubis Wild ETH 8.968 38.571 G3-X JX946196 Zinner et al., 2013
P. hamadryas MfN ZMB_Mam_042543_(1) ETH 9.593 41.866 G3-Z OQ538084 this study
P. hamadryas MfN ZMB_Mam_074849 DJI 11.589 43.129 G3-Z OQ538085 this study
P. hamadryas MNHN MO-1972–359 ETH 6.998 40.478 G3-Z OQ538086 this study
P. hamadryas SMNS SMNS-Z-MAM-001288 SDN 19.110 37.327 G3-Y OQ538081 this study
P. hamadryas Wild ERI 15.011 38.971 G3-Y JX946201 Zinner et al., 2013
P. hamadryas SMNS SMNS-Z-MAM-007509† - - - G3-Y OQ538082 this study
P. hamadryas MHNL 51000172 EGY - - G3-Y OQ538083 this study
P. anubis SMNS SMNS-Z-MAM-000584 ‡ SDN 13.460 33.780 G3-Y OQ538075 this study
P. cynocephalus Wild TNZ 7.347 37.165 G1 JX946199 Zinner et al., 2013
P. cynocephalus MNHN ZM-MO-1977-5 SOM 3.243 45.471 G1 OQ538088 this study
P. anubis NHMUK ZD1929.4.27.2 COD 0.800 26.633 J MT279061 Roos et al., 2021
P. anubis NHMUK ZD1929.4.27.1 COD 1.183 27.650 J MT279062 Roos et al., 2021
P. anubis Wild 19GNM2220916 TNZ 4.679 29.621 J MG787545 Roos et al., 2018
P. anubis SMNS SMNS-Z-MAM-032128 SSD 4.281 33.555 J OQ538087 this study
P. anubis SMNS SMNS-Z-MAM-000583 SDN 13.333 32.729 J OQ538077 this study
P. anubis MfN ZMB_Mam_074869 CMR 5.533 12.317 F OQ538071 Kopp et al. in prep
P. anubis Wild NGA 7.317 11.583 F JX946198 Zinner et al., 2013
P. anubis MfN ZMB_Mam_074887 CMR 9.328 12.946 F OQ538069 Kopp et al. in prep
P. anubis MfN ZMB_Mam_074885 NGA 7.298 10.318 F OQ538064 Kopp et al. in prep
P. anubis MfN ZMB_Mam_074883 CMR 6.334 9.961 F OQ538072 Kopp et al. in prep
P. papio Wild SEN 12.883 12.767 E JX946203 Zinner et al., 2013
P. anubis NHMUK ZD.1947.586 SLE 8.917 11.817 E MT279064 Roos et al., 2021
P. anubis MfN ZMB_Mam_075043 TGO 9.260 0.781 D OQ538066 Kopp et al. in prep
P. anubis MfN ZMB_Mam_011198 TGO 6.228 1.478 D OQ538067 Kopp et al. in prep
P. anubis Wild CIV 8.800 3.790 D JX946197 Zinner et al., 2013
P. anubis MfN ZMB_Mam_007396_(1) TGO 6.950 0.585 D OQ538065 Kopp et al. in prep
P. anubis NHMUK ZD.1939.1022 NER 17.000 7.933 D MT279065 Roos et al., 2021
P. anubis NHMUK ZD.1939.1020 NER 17.683 8.483 D MT279066 Roos et al., 2021
P. anubis MNHN ZM-MO-1960-476 TCD 20.344 16.786 K MT279067 Roos et al., 2021
P. anubis MNHN MO-1996-2511 CAF 3.905 17.922 K OQ538068 Kopp et al. in prep
P. anubis NHMUK ZD.1907.7.8.11 CAF 8.000 20.000 K MT279068 Roos et al., 2021
P. anubis MNHN MO-1996-2510 CAF 4.966 18.701 K OQ538070 Kopp et al. in prep
P.ursinus Wild ZAF 24.680 30.790 B JX946205 Zinner et al., 2013
P. cynocephalus Wild TNZ 11.261 37.514 B JX946200 Zinner et al., 2013
P. kindae ZMB 12.591 30.252 C JX946202 Zinner et al., 2013
P. cynocephalus Wild 04MNM1300916 TNZ 6.119 29.730 H MT279069 Roos et al., 2021
P. ursinus Wild ZAF 34.456 20.407 A JX946204 Zinner et al., 2013
P. cynocephalus Wild 24UNF1150317 TNZ 7.815 36.895 MT279060 Roos et al., 2021
Theropithecus gelada FJ785426 Hodgson et al., 2009
Open in a new tab

AccNo, GenBank accession number; NHMUK, Natural History Museum, London; MNHN, Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris; MfN, Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin; SMNS, State Museum of Natural History Stuttgart; MdC, Musée des Confluences, Lyon.

*

Mislabelled in museum records as T. gelada.

†

Unclear provenance ‘Somaliland’ (not equal to present-day Somaliland).

‡

Misidentified provenance ‘Abyssinia’ as Ethiopia in museum records.

Results

Mitogenomes from mummified and historic specimens

We discarded seven historic samples and nine mummified samples from our analysis due to insufficient DNA content, sequencing failure, or low coverage and sequencing depth (Supplementary file 1). Thus, our results are based on the newly generated mitogenomes of 14 historic and 1 mummified individual (Table 1). In total, we obtained 896,025,770 raw sequence reads, with a mean of 34,462,530 (± SD 27,945,321) raw sequence reads per sample. On average, 95.5% of reads survived trimming and a median of 9934 (range: 244–2,722,354) reads per sample mapped to the reference mitogenome. After removal of duplicates (duplication level median: 25.1%; range: 2.5–92.6%), a median of 7398 (range: 237–497,458) mapped reads per sample resulted in the median final sequencing depth of 26× (range: 0.21–2952×). After exclusion of samples with low quality, the final dataset had a median final sequencing depth of 37× (range: 16–2952×), with a median of 0.4% undetermined sites (range: 0–1.7%) and a median breadth of coverage of at least 3× of 99.3% (range: 97.4–100%) (Supplementary file 1). All these metrics differed considerably depending on sample age (historic versus mummified) and DNA concentration (Figures 3 and 4). Capture enrichment strongly increased the number of mapped reads and final mean coverage compared to the shotgun approach (Figures 3 and 4). GC content of sequences was 40–50% (Figure 5) in the same range as the reference genomes.

Figure 3. Comparison of DNA concentration and amount of distinct mapped reads.

Figure 3.

Open in a new tab

A higher DNA concentration produces a higher number of distinct mapped reads. Capture enrichment additionally increases the number of distinct mapped reads. Circles and triangles depict the different sequencing approaches, enrichment, and shotgun, respectively; size is related to the final coverage of the mitogenome; colours represent the different sample types and sequencing approaches (yellow: shotgun sequencing of the mummified sample, MHNL 51000172; blue: shotgun sequencing of historic sample; purple: capture enrichment of historic sample; green: capture enrichment of mummy sample).

Figure 4. Overview of sequencing success for museum and mummy specimens.

Figure 4.

Open in a new tab

Mean (± SD) final coverage of the mitogenome is shown for each sample (with abbreviated museum ID). Circles and triangles depict the different sequencing approaches, enrichment and shotgun, respectively; colours represent the different sample types and sequencing approaches (yellow: shotgun sequencing of mummy sample; blue: shotgun sequencing of historic sample; purple: capture enrichment of historic sample; green: capture enrichment of mummy sample). Dashed line shows the cut-off limit 10× for mean final coverage; samples below were excluded from final analyses.

Figure 5. Distribution of GC content in historic samples and mummified samples.

Figure 5.

Open in a new tab

The sequencing reads of the mummified sample (MHNL51000172) exhibit C to T and G to A misincorporations at 5′ and 3′ ends, reaching frequencies of 3.3 and 1.6% at the first/last position of the read (Figure 6). Mapped reads of the mummified sample agreed to median of 99.2% (IQR 1.6%) when focussing on the 125 sites that exhibited fixed differences between subclades and differed at three sites from the variant found in its subclade (Figure 7a). When focussing on the 37 sites that are fixed in the subclade of attribution of the mummified baboon but differed in its consensus sequence, mapped reads agreed to a median of 97.3% (IQR 3.1%) (Figure 7b).

Figure 6. DNA damage plot for the sample of the mummified baboon MHNL 51000172 from 5′ and 3′ read ends, showing mean frequencies of C to T substitutions (red), G to A substitutions (blue), deletions (grey), and insertions (yellow) over the first/last 25 positions.

Figure 6.

Open in a new tab

Figure 7. Barplots showing the bases of mapped reads for the sample of the mummified baboon MHNL 51000172 at sites that (a) exhibit fixed differences among northeastern subclades and (b) are fixed in subclade G3-Y but differ in the consensus sequence of the mummified baboon.

Figure 7.

Open in a new tab

Sites are named according to their position and the base in the G3-Y consensus sequence and coloured by base. Bases are colour-coded (A: red; C: blue; G: yellow, T: green).

Phylogenetic mapping

Phylogenetic trees inferred from maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian inference (BI) revealed identical topologies with generally strong node support (100% bootstrap support [BS] and posterior probability [PP] 1.0) and clearly defined geographic clades (Figure 8, Figure 8—figure supplement 1). These mitochondrial clades did not directly mirror species assignments. Within the northeastern baboons, the central olive baboon clade J from Democratic Republic of the Congo, Tanzania, South Sudan, and southern Sudan diverged first, followed by northern yellow baboons of clade G1 including a sample from Somalia. Hamadryas baboons formed clade G3, which also included olive baboons from the region. Clade G3 contained three subclades: subclade G3-Z comprised hamadryas baboons from Ethiopia and Djibouti; subclade G3-X comprised hamadryas and olive baboons from Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Somalia; and subclade G3-Y comprised hamadryas and olive baboons from northeastern Sudan and Eritrea. The mummified baboon from Gabbanat el-Qurud (MHNL 51000172) was located in subclade G3-Y, closely related to samples from Eritrea and northeastern Sudan.

Figure 8. Phylogeny of baboons based on complete mitochondrial genomes as inferred from maximum likelihood analysis.

P. cynocephalus from the Udzungwa Mountains and outgroup T. gelada were omitted from visualization for clarity. The analysed baboon mummy sample MHNL 51000172 (in bold) falls into clade G3-Y. Clade names (A–K) according to Roos et al., 2021, subclades X–Z according to Kopp et al., 2014b; sample IDs include putative species (P.ham, P. hamadryas; P.anu, P. anubis; P.cyn, P. cynocephalus; P.urs, P. ursinus; P.pap, P. papio), country of origin code (CAF, Central African Republic; CMR, Cameroon; COD, Democratic Republic of Congo; DJI, Djibouti; ERI, Eritrea; ETH, Ethiopia; NGA, Nigeria; SDN, Sudan; SSD, South Sudan; SEN, Senegal; SLE, Sierra Leone; SOM, Somalia; TGO, Togo; note that sample SMNS7509 is of unclear geoprovenance), and abbreviated museum code. Nodes with a branch support below 95% are marked with a grey dot. Mitochondrial genomes generated in this study are marked with an asterisk.

Figure 8.

Figure 8—figure supplement 1. Phylogeny of baboons based on complete mitochondrial genomes under Bayesian inference.

Figure 8—figure supplement 1.

Outgroups (T. gelada and P. cynocephalus-Udzungwa) were omitted from visualization for clarity. The analysed baboon mummy sample MHNL 51000172 (in bold) falls into clade G3-Y. Clade names (A–K) according to Roos et al., 2021, subclades according to Kopp et al., 2014b; sample IDs include putative species (P.ham, P. hamadryas; P.anu, P. anubis; P.cyn, P. cynocephalus; P.urs, P. ursinus; P.pap, P. papio), country of origin code (CAF, Central African Republic; CMR, Cameroon; COD, Democratic Republic of Congo; DJI, Djibouti; ERI, Eritrea; ETH, Ethiopia; NGA, Nigeria; SDN, Sudan; SSD, South Sudan; SEN, Senegal; SLE, Sierra Leone; SOM, Somalia; TGO, Togo; note that sample SMNS7509 is of unclear geoprovenance), and abbreviated museum code. Nodes with PP < 95 are marked with a grey dot. Mitochondrial genomes generated in this study are marked with an asterisk.
Open in a new tab

The median-joining haplotype networks differentiated samples within clade G3 in greater detail and in a more precise geographic context (Figure 9, Figure 9—figure supplement 1). They revealed the same three subclades within the G3 clade. The HVRI and the cyt b networks were concordant both with each other and with the phylogenetic reconstructions in the attribution of samples to the different subclades, but exhibited slight discrepancies in the relation of clades to each other and the positioning of samples within the clades. Subclade G3-X contained hamadryas baboons from Ethiopia, Somalia, and Eritrea. Subclade G3-Z contained samples from Ethiopia, Somalia, Djibouti, from the southern tip of Eritrea, and the Arabian Peninsula. Subclade G3-Y contained samples from Eritrea, eastern Sudan, the Arabian Peninsula, and the mummified sample MHNL 51000172. Individuals closely related to this mummified baboon in the cyt b network were those from Sudan (on the Red Sea coast and in Senaar), Eritrea (between 14.3–16.0N 36.7–39.0E), and the Arabian Peninsula (Figure 9—figure supplement 1), and in the HVRI network samples from location ‘Bbr’ (Barka Bridge, 15.6N 38.0E) in Eritrea (Figure 9).

Figure 9. Median-joining haplotype network of northeastern baboons based on 644 HVRI sequences (176 bp).

The analysed baboon mummy sample resolves in clade G3-Y (depicted in red, black arrow). Circle colour reflects species and country of origin (‘Arabia’' comprises samples from Yemen and Saudi Arabia, ‘Strait’ comprises samples from near the Bab-el-Mandab Strait, i.e. southern Eritrea, Djibouti, northern Somalia).

Figure 9.

Figure 9—figure supplement 1. Median-joining haplotype network of northeastern baboons based on 137 cyt b sequences (1140 bp).

Figure 9—figure supplement 1.

The analysed baboon mummy sample resolves in clade G3-Y (depicted in red, arrow). Circle colour reflects species and country of origin (‘Arabia’ comprises samples from Yemen and Saudi Arabia, ‘strait’ comprises samples from near the Bab-el-Mandab Strait, i.e. southern Eritrea, Djibouti, northern Somalia).
Open in a new tab

Discussion

We succeeded in sequencing the mitogenomes of 14 historic baboons from northeastern Africa and a mummified baboon recovered from Gabbanat el-Qurud, presenting the first genetic data of a mummified baboon from ancient Egypt to date. DNA of the mummified baboon shows post-mortem damage, which is, however, relatively low compared to what can be expected for samples of similar age (Dabney et al., 2013b, Kistler et al., 2017). Low frequencies of post-mortem damage were observed for aDNA from mummified specimens and have been attributed to the water deprivation during the mummification process, which may prevent hydrolytic deamination (Rossi et al., 2021). Post-mortem damage observed here is within the range previously reported for aDNA derived from mummified Egyptians (Schuenemann et al., 2017) and sheep recovered from an Iranian saltmine (Rossi et al., 2021), which supports the authentic origin of our ancient sequence data and tends to rule out the possibility of contamination with modern DNA. The very low frequency of mismatches in the mapped reads from the mummified sample and its unique sequence are further evidence against the concern of contamination from other baboon samples.

Our phylogenetic analysis of the newly generated mitogenomes in combination with published mitochondrial sequence data produced tree topologies in agreement with those of prior studies, with three well-supported clades across the northeastern distribution of Papio (Roos et al., 2021). As previously described, introgressive hybridization has led to discordances between species assignment and mitochondrial clades (Rogers et al., 2019; Sørensen et al., 2023; Zinner et al., 2009; Zinner et al., 2011). Our findings are notable for including specimens from previously unsampled or underrepresented regions, filling gaps in our knowledge of the distribution of mitochondrial clades. For instance, we report mitochondrial sequence data of baboons from regions previously unstudied, namely South Sudan and Sudan. We show that samples from South and southern Sudan, east of the White Nile, nest within the central olive baboon clade J, whereas samples from the coastal region of Sudan and east of the Blue Nile nest within the hamadryas clade G3. These findings expand the northern distributions of both clade J and clade G3 significantly, while also highlighting a strong geographic affinity between clade J and the Albertine Rift and (White) Nile Valley. Taxonomically, this clade corresponds with two subspecies recognized by Hill, 1970: P. a. heuglini and P. a. tesselatum.

A mummified hamadryas baboon from Gabbanat el-Qurud (MHNL 51000172) yielded sufficient aDNA to produce a complete mitogenome, which fell unequivocally in subclade G3-Y (cf. Kopp et al., 2014b). Haplotype networks allowed us to further refine subclade G3-Y, which consists of P. hamadryas and P. anubis samples from Eritrea and P. anubis samples from neighbouring regions in Sudan. G3-Y also includes samples from the southern-most distribution of P. hamadryas on the Arabian Peninsula. Geographic stability of phylogenetic clades over millennia has been shown for other baboon populations (Mathieson et al., 2020), leading us to infer that MHNL 51000172 (or its maternal ancestor) originated in the region where clade G3-Y exists today. We cannot completely rule out an Arabian origin for MHNL 51000172, as our data does not cover the entire historic and present haplotype diversity there, but the tight clustering of the currently available Arabian sequences and distances in the HVRI network make an Arabian origin of MHNL 51000172 unlikely. Similarly, the close relationship with a sample of P. anubis from Sudan east of the Blue Nile (SMNS-Z-MAM-000584) could indicate trafficking of baboons along the Nile, as suggested for specimens of P. anubis recovered from Ptolemaic catacombs (Brandon-Jones and Goudsmit, 2022; Peters, 2020) and the Predynastic site of Hierakonpolis (Van Neer et al., 2004). However, MHNL 51000172 was identified phenotypically as P. hamadryas (Lortet and Gaillard, 1907), and the distribution of hamadryas baboons is restricted to more eastern regions (Figure 2). If the distributions of baboons in northeastern Africa have remained roughly stable within the last 2500 y (as supported by ecological niche modelling; Chala et al., 2019), the region in Sudan east of the Blue Nile and west of the Atbarah River could not have served as a source region for hamadryas baboons. Thus, it stands to reason that MHNL 51000172 (or its maternal ancestor) was captured in present-day Eritrea (or close neighbouring regions) and trafficked to Egypt. The value of this finding is twofold. First, it connects the mummified baboon to populations that live today in Eritrea and eastern Sudan, between 13° and 20° latitude. Second, it corroborates the reports of Greco-Roman historians, who described Eritrea, and specifically Adulis, as the sole source of P. hamadryas for Ptolemaic Egyptians.

Yet, this baboon predates the reign of Ptolemy I by centuries, presuming it is contemporaneous with another baboon (MHNL 90001206) in the same assemblage, ca. 800–540 BCE (Richardin et al., 2017). Thus, our findings raise the possibility that Adulis already existed as a trading centre or entrepôt during the 25th and 26th dynasties of Egypt. Although speculative, and expressed with due caution, our reasoning would extend the antiquity of Egyptian–Adulite trade by as much as five centuries.

Arguing for pre-Ptolemaic contact between Egypt and Adulis is fraught in the absence of corroborating material evidence—but even so, the archaeological record is not entirely silent on the prospect. Manzo, 2010 and others (Zazzaro et al., 2014) reassessed the ceramic tradition at Adulis and developed a chronology that stretches to the early second millennium BCE, the deepest levels of which contained a fragment of blue glass with yellow inlays similar to Egyptian glass from the New Kingdom (Fattovich, 2018). In Egypt, contact with the Eritrean lowlands is attested by trade goods dating to ca. 1800–1650 BCE or earlier, including potsherds, obsidian, and fragments of carbonized ebony (Fattovich, 2018; Lucarini et al., 2020). Discovered at Mersa Gawasis, a Middle Kingdom harbour, these artefacts appear to align the prehistory of Adulis with the fabled Land of Punt (Bard and Fattovich, 2018; Manzo, 2010; Manzo, 2012), an enigmatic toponym scattered across scant and disconnected records (Cooper, 2020).

Punt existed in a region south and east of Egypt, and was accessible by land or sea. For Egyptians, Punt was a source of ‘marvels,’ particularly incense, but also baboons, that drove bidirectional trade for 1300 y (ca. 2500–1170 BCE) (Tallet, 2013). Some scholars have described this enterprise as the beginning of economic globalization (Fattovich, 2012), whereas others view it as the earliest maritime leg of the spice route (Keay, 2006), a trade network that would shape geopolitical fortunes for millennia. The global historical importance of Punt is therefore considerable, but there is a problem—its location is uncertain, in part because the toponym fades from view. From the early first millennium BCE, there are no further records of Egyptians in Punt or of Puntites visiting Egypt. There are, however, two incomplete inscriptions that mention Punt in a narrative context, and both are attributed to the 26th (Saite) Dynasty (Betrò, 1996; Cavasin, 2019). One of these, the Defenneh stele, describes an expedition to Punt that was saved from dying thirst by unexpected rainfall on ‘the mountains of Punt’ (Meeks, 2003). The Defenneh stele is a testament to the efforts of Saitic pharaohs to revive maritime commerce on the Red Sea (Lloyd, 1977), while also raising the possibility of renewed trade with Punt. It is perhaps no coincidence that the Saite dynasty (664–525 BCE) exists squarely within the radiometric date range of hamadryas baboons from Gabbanat el-Qurud.

Punt, like Adulis, was a source of baboons for Egyptians, a history that raises the possibility of using baboons as a tool for testing geographic hypotheses. Recently, Dominy et al., 2020 used stable isotope mapping methods to determine the geoprovenance of mummified baboons from Thebes (modern-day Luxor) and dated to the (late) New Kingdom. Their results pointed to present-day Ethiopia, Eritrea, or Djibouti, as well as portions of Somalia, an area that corroborates most scholarly views on the location of Punt (Breyer, 2016; Kitchen, 2004), but see Meeks, 2002; Meeks, 2003; Tallet, 2013. Here, we used aDNA to show that at least one baboon from the 25th Dynasty or Late Period of Egyptian history—a span that coincides with the last known expeditions to Punt, but predates Greco-Roman accounts of Adulis as a source of baboons—can be traced to Eritrea. Thus, our findings appear to establish primatological continuity between Punt and Adulis. Such a conclusion must be viewed with caution, but it bolsters recurrent conjecture among some historical archaeologists: that Punt and Adulis were essentially the same trading centre from different eras of Egyptian antiquity (Doresse, 1959; Fattovich, 2018; Kitchen, 2004; Massa, 2021; Phillips, 1997; Sleeswyk, 1983).

At minimum, our results reinforce the view that ancient Egyptian mariners travelled great distances to acquire living baboons. A great strength of this conclusion is that it is based on distinct but complementary methods, but of course, the sample size is paltry and limited to P. hamadryas, one of two baboon species recovered from Gabbanat el-Qurud. Moving forward, it would be desirable to expand the sample size, examine specimens of P. anubis as well as nuclear genomic data for increased precision, and include different time intervals of baboon mummification.

Future directions

Direct radiocarbon dating of MHNL 51000172 and other baboons from Gabbanat el-Qurud is an urgent priority, in part because doing so would put these specimens into conversation with those from the catacombs of Tuna el-Gebel. The oldest gallery at Tuna el-Gebel, Gallery D, is dated to the 26th Dynasty and contains a single species of baboon: P. anubis. Some scholars (Peters, 2020; von den Driesch et al., 2004) have argued that these olive baboons, as well as Chlorocebus aethiops (also found in Gallery D), were sourced from the Sudanese Nile Valley and adjacent areas, which predicts membership in clade G3-Y, although clade J is also plausible. Construction of Gallery C began during the first period of Persian rule in Egypt (524–404 BCE) and continued through the 30th and Ptolemaic dynasties. As every phase of Gallery C contains mummified specimens of both P. anubis and P. hamadryas, there is rich opportunity to explore diachronic changes in trade routes using phylogeographic methods. Uniform membership in clade G3-Y, for example, would affirm that Late Period Egyptians were sourcing P. hamadryas from Eritrea as early as the sixth century BCE. Testing this hypothesis may prove rewarding.

Materials and methods

DNA extraction and sequencing

DNA damage and degradation is expected from ancient (mummified) and nineteenth/early twentieth-century museum specimens. We therefore analysed mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), which is available in higher copy numbers than nuclear DNA and holds greater potential for success when sample quality is poor. We analysed complete mitogenomes because they are effective for reconstructing robust mitochondrial phylogenies of modern baboons and have proven to indicate the geographic origin of the corresponding sample reliably (Roos et al., 2021; Zinner et al., 2013). Recent advances in sequencing technologies allow the successful sequencing of mitogenomes either with a shotgun sequencing approach or, for samples with very low DNA quality and quantity, with a capture enrichment approach (Schuenemann et al., 2017; Shapiro and Hofreiter, 2012).

We extracted DNA with a specific column-based method aimed at the recovery of short DNA fragments following established protocols and necessary precautions for the analysis of aDNA (Dabney et al., 2013a; Rohland et al., 2004; Roos et al., 2021). In particular, samples from mummified specimens were extracted separately and in a dedicated aDNA laboratory to prevent cross-contamination. Concentration of DNA extracts was measured on a Qubit fluorometer (Life Technologies, Singapore) and quality checked on a Bioanalyzer (Agilent, Santa Clara, USA) or Tapestation 2200 (Agilent). All samples were initially sequenced with a shotgun approach. Samples with DNA extract concentrations below 4.5 ng/μl or final mitogenome sequencing depth below 10×, and with enough remaining DNA extract, were enriched for mtDNA with a capture approach.

For the shotgun approach, sequencing libraries were prepared with the NEBNext Ultra II DNA Library Prep Kit (New England BioLabs, Frankfurt, Germany) according to the manufacturer’s instructions without prior fragmentation. Library concentration and quality were assessed with the Qubit Fluorometer and Bioanalyzer and molarity was estimated via qPCR with the NEBNext Library Quant Kit (New England BioLabs). Libraries were single indexed with NEBNext Multiplex Oligos (New England BioLabs) with 5–11 PCR cycles and cleaned up with the kit’s beads.

For the capture enrichment approach, RNA baits (myBaits custom Kit, Arbor Biosciences, Ann Arbor, USA) were designed for the mitogenome of P. anubis East (GenBank Acc. No. JX946196; Zinner et al., 2013). We prepared libraries with the Accel-NGS 1S Plus DNA Library Kit and the 1S Plus Dual Indexing Kit (Swift Biosciences, Ann Arbor, USA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions for small fragment retention. Hybridization capture was performed with a 48 hr incubation step according to the manufacturer’s instructions for highly degraded DNA. After library amplification with 14 PCR cycles, libraries were cleaned with SPRIselect beads (Beckmann Coulter, Krefeld, Germany).

Sequencing was performed with 24 libraries per lane (23 samples + pooled negative control to monitor contamination) on an Illumina HiSeq4000 (50 bp, single-end read) at the NGS Integrative Genomics core unit of the University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany, or on a NovaSeq6000 SP flow cell (100 bp, paired-end read) at the Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, Berlin, Germany. Capture enrichment libraries were reloaded and sequenced a second time to increase the number of reads.

Mitogenome assembly

Raw sequencing reads were demultiplexed and adapters trimmed at the sequencing facilities. We performed subsequent sequence processing on the central high-performance computing cluster bwForCluster BinAC. We checked read quality with FastQC 0.11.8 (Andrews, 2010), trimmed and filtered reads with Trimmomatic 0.39 (Bolger et al., 2014) using the settings ILLUMINACLIP:TruSeq3-PE.fa:2:30:10 MINLEN:30 SLIDINGWINDOW:4:20 LEADING:20 TRAILING:20, AVGQUAL:30, and confirmed adequate quality of trimmed reads again with FastQC. Reads were mapped with Burrows Wheeler Aligner (BWA) backtrack 0.7.17 (Li and Durbin, 2009) using default settings independently to each of the seven different mitogenomes of representatives of the northern baboon clades (P. anubis East JX946196; P. anubis Gombe MG787545; P. anubis West1 JX946197; P. anubis West 2JX946198; P. cynocephalus North JX946199; P. hamadryas JX946201; P. papio JX946203). We chose this approach to avoid biases in downstream analyses introduced through the choice of the reference genome and used the consensus sequence resulting from the best mapping results in downstream analyses. We did not adjust the settings as usually recommended to improve mapping results for aDNA (Schubert et al., 2012) but were stringent in mapping and filtering of reads to avoid the inclusion of nuclear mitochondrial DNA segments (NUMTs). Alignments were indexed with SAMtools 1.10 ‘index’ and filtered with ‘view’ for mapped and (in the case of paired-end data) properly paired reads with a mapping quality of at least MAPQ 30. Library complexity was estimated with the ‘EstimateLibraryComplexity’ from the Picard Toolkit 2.20.4 (Broad Institute, 2019). We merged BAM files of the same samples with ‘MergeSamFiles’ and removed duplicates with ‘MarkDuplicates’ from the Picard Toolkit. DNA damage was estimated calculating the frequency of base substitutions, insertions, and deletions at the 5′ and 3′ end, respectively, with DamageProfiler 1.0 (Neukamm et al., 2021). We calculated average sequencing depth with SAMtools 1.10 ‘depth’ (Li et al., 2009) as the sum of reads covering each position divided by the number of bases in the reference genome, and estimated GC-bias with ‘CollectGCBiasMetrics’ from the Picard Toolkit. We created a consensus sequence for each sample with the ‘doFasta’ option in ANGSD (Korneliussen et al., 2014) using the base with the highest effective depth (EBD) and setting positions with coverage below 2 to undetermined. We only retained mitogenomes for further analyses for which at least 80% of the sequence were covered at 3×.

We augmented our dataset with published mitogenomes of baboons (Roos et al., 2021) and T. gelada as outgroup (Table 1) and aligned sequences with MUSCLE 3.8.81 (Edgar, 2004) as implemented in the package msa 1.28.0 (Bodenhofer et al., 2015) in R 4.2.1 (R Development Core Team, 2022) using standard settings with a maximum number of 16 iterations.

For a more fine-scale geographic representation, we further included published sequence data from the northeastern part of the baboon distribution of two different mitochondrial markers with differing resolution: the cytochrome b gene (cyt b) (Zinner et al., 2009; Zinner et al., 2015) and a fragment of the hypervariable region I (HVRI) of the D-loop (Hapke et al., 2001; Kopp et al., 2014a; Kopp et al., 2014b; Städele et al., 2015; Winney et al., 2004). We extracted the corresponding regions from the mitogenome alignment and again removed sequences with more than 10% undetermined sites.

We assessed contamination by checking mismatches of the mapped reads from the mummified sample at sites in the mitogenome that (i) are distinct between northeastern subclades (125 fixed differences) and (ii) are fixed in subclade G3-Y (considering all samples but the mummified baboon) but differ in the consensus sequence of the mummified sample (37 sites).

Phylogenetic reconstruction

To identify the phylogenetic affiliation of the newly investigated samples, we reconstructed phylogenetic trees based on the final dataset of 46 mitogenomes (alignment length: 16,628 bp) using ML and BI methods with W-IQ-Tree 1.6.12 (Nguyen et al., 2015; Trifinopoulos et al., 2016) and MrBayes 3.2.7 (Huelsenbeck and Ronquist, 2001; Ronquist and Huelsenbeck, 2003), respectively. We treated the mitogenome as a single partition, the optimal substitution model for phylogenetic reconstructions was detected to be TN + F + I + G4 (Tamura and Nei, 1993) under the Bayesian information criterion and GTR + F + I + G4 (Tavaré, 1986) under the Corrected Akaike Information Criterion with Modelfinder (Kalyaanamoorthy et al., 2017) as implemented in W-IQ-Tree. The ML tree was reconstructed with 10,000 ultrafast bootstrap replications (Hoang et al., 2018) applying the TN + F + I + G4 model. The BI tree was reconstructed applying the GTR + I + G model and using four independent Markov chain Monte Carlo runs with 1 million generations, a burn-in of 25%, and sampling every 100 generations. To ensure convergence, the Potential Scale Reduction Factor was checked to be close to 1 for all parameters. We visualized phylogenetic trees with the R package ggtree 3.4.2 (Yu et al., 2017) and adopted clade nomination of Roos et al., 2021 and Kopp et al., 2014b.

Haplotype networks

To determine the mitochondrial clade of origin of the analysed samples more precisely, we reconstructed median-joining haplotype networks (Bandelt et al., 1999) with Popart 1.7 (Leigh and Bryant, 2015) for both the HVRI (n = 644, 176 bp) and the cyt b (n = 137, 1140 bp) dataset.

Geographic maps

Geographic maps were created in R. We obtained species distribution shapefiles from IUCN (Gippoliti, 2019; Sithaldeen, 2019; Wallis, 2020a; Wallis, 2020b; Wallis et al., 2020; Wallis et al., 2021), river, lake and coastlines from Natural Earth (https://www.naturalearthdata.com) via rnaturalearth 0.1.0 (Massicotte and South, 2023).

Acknowledgements

We thank Frieder Mayer and Christiane Funk from MfN Berlin for sharing baboon samples with us for genetic analyses. We thank Christiane Schwarz for assistance in DNA extraction and library preparation and Bernd Timmermann and Stefan Börno for advice and facilitation of sequencing. We are grateful to Salima Ikram and Julien Cooper for energizing discussion on the topics of Egyptian mummification and toponyms, and thank Laura Epp for advice on aDNA analyses. Research carried out on the mummies curated at the Musée des Confluences (Lyon, France) is supported by the SIMoS Program funded by LabEx ARCHIMEDE from 'Investir L’Avenir' program ANR-11-LABX-0032-01 to SP. We acknowledge the Service des Musées de France, Mme Dominique Dupuis-Labbé and the Ministère de la Culture et de la Communication (France) for their ongoing support to the research carried out on the mummies. We acknowledge the support by the High Performance and Cloud Computing Group at the Zentrum für Datenverarbeitung of the University of Tübingen, the state of Baden-Württemberg through bwHPC and the German Research Foundation (DFG) through grant no INST 37/935-1 FUGG. We acknowledge the University of Konstanz Sequencing Analysis (SequAna) Core Facility for bioinformatic assistance. This study was funded by the Young Scholar Fund and the Zukunftskolleg, University of Konstanz (funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and the Baden-Württemberg Ministry of Science as part of the Excellence Strategy of the German Federal and State Governments), and the Junge Akademie at the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities and the German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina. NJD received support through a Senior Fellowship at the Zukunftskolleg, GHK was supported by the Hector Pioneer Fellowship of Hector Stiftung II and the Zukunftskolleg. Some of the views in this paper were developed during a workshop titled, “Animating Ancient Trade Routes Through Primate Lifeways,” funded by the Wenner-Gren Foundation and Zukunftskolleg. Finally, we thank the handling editors, Julien Cooper, and an anonymous reviewer for their thoughtful suggestions.

Funding Statement

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication. Open access funding provided by Max Planck Society.

Contributor Information

Gisela H Kopp, Email: gisela.kopp@uni-konstanz.de.

Ammie K Kalan, University of Victoria, Canada.

Christian Rutz, University of St Andrews, United Kingdom.

Funding Information

This paper was supported by the following grants:

  • Universität Konstanz Young Scholar Fund to Gisela H Kopp.

  • Universität Konstanz Zukunftskolleg to Nathaniel J Dominy, Gisela H Kopp.

  • Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Open Access Fund to Gisela H Kopp.

  • Hector Stiftung II Hector Pioneer Fellowship to Gisela H Kopp.

  • Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina - Nationale Akademie der Wissenschaften Die Junge Akademie to Gisela H Kopp.

  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung Excellence Strategy of the German Federal and State Governments to Benjamin Hume, Gisela H Kopp.

  • Ministerium für Wissenschaft, Forschung und Kunst Baden-Württemberg bwHPC to Franziska Grathwol, Benjamin Hume, Gisela H Kopp.

  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft INST 37/935- 1 FUGG to Franziska Grathwol, Benjamin Hume, Gisela H Kopp.

  • Agence Nationale de la Recherche ANR-11-LABX-0032-01 to Stéphanie M Porcier.

  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft Centre of Excellence 2117 "Centre for the Advanced Study of Collective Behaviour" ID: 422037984 to Gisela H Kopp.

Additional information

Competing interests

No competing interests declared.

Author contributions

Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology, Writing - original draft, Project administration.

Resources, Data curation, Supervision, Methodology, Writing - review and editing.

Data curation, Writing - review and editing.

Software, Formal analysis, Writing - review and editing.

Resources, Data curation, Writing - review and editing.

Resources, Data curation, Writing - review and editing.

Resources, Data curation, Writing - review and editing.

Resources, Data curation, Writing - review and editing.

Resources, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing - review and editing.

Writing - review and editing.

Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing - review and editing.

Conceptualization, Resources, Data curation, Software, Formal analysis, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology, Writing - original draft, Project administration, Writing - review and editing.

Additional files

Supplementary file 1. Overview of analysed samples and sequencing results (provided as .csv).
elife-87513-supp1.csv (9.6KB, csv)
MDAR checklist

Data availability

Raw sequencing data are deposited in the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA, project accession no. PRJEB60261), mitochondrial genomes on Genbank (accession numbers: OQ538075-OQ538089). Code used for data processing and analysis is available on OSF via https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/D5GX3.

The following datasets were generated:

Kopp GH. 2023. Adulis and the transshipment of baboons during classical antiquity. Open Science Framework.

Kopp GH. 2023. Adulis and the transshipment of baboons during classical antiquity. European Nucleotide Archive. PRJEB60261

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio anubis isolate mitoclade G3-Y voucher Z-MAM-000584 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538075

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher Z-MAM-001034 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538076

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio anubis isolate mitoclade J voucher Z-MAM-000583 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538077

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer Z, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher Z-MAM-000960 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538078

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher ZMB_Mam-025647 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538079

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher MO-1972-357 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538080

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Y voucher Z-MAM-001288 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538081

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Y voucher Z-MAM-007509 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538082

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas voucher 51000172 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538083

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Z voucher ZMB_Mam-042543 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538084

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Z voucher ZMB_Mam-074849 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538085

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Z voucher MO-1972-359 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538086

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio anubis isolate mitoclade J voucher Z-MAM-032128 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538087

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio cynocephalus voucher ZM-MO-1977-5 mitochondrion, partial genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538088

Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher ZMB_Mam_012808 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538089

References

  1. Andrews S. Fastqc: A quality control tool for high throughput sequence data. Babraham Bioinformatics. FastQC. 2010 https://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc/
  2. Bandelt HJ, Forster P, Röhl A. Median-joining networks for inferring intraspecific phylogenies. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 1999;16:37–48. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bard KA, Fattovich R. Seafaring Expeditions to Punt in the Middle Kingdom: Excavations at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis, Egypt. Leiden: Brill; 2018. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Betrò M. Punt, la XXVI dinastia e il frammento di statua del Museo Pushkin I.1.B 1025. Egitto e Vicino Oriente. 1996;19:41–49. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bodenhofer U, Bonatesta E, Horejš-Kainrath C, Hochreiter S. msa: an R package for multiple sequence alignment. Bioinformatics. 2015;31:3997–3999. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btv494. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Boessneck J. Tuna El-Gebel I: Die Tiergalerien. Hildesheim: Gerstenberg Verlag; 1987. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bolger AM, Lohse M, Usadel B. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics. 2014;30:2114–2120. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu170. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bowersock GW. The Throne of Adulis: Red Sea Wars on the Eve of Islam. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  9. Brandon-Jones D, Goudsmit J. In: World Archaeoprimatology: Interconnections of Humans and Nonhuman Primates in the Past. Urbani B, Youlatos D, Antczak A, editors. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2022. The nonhuman Primate remains from the baboon Catacomb at Saqqara in Egypt; pp. 311–353. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Breyer F. Punt: Die Suche Nach Dem “Gottesland". Leiden: Brill; 2016. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Broad Institute Picard Toolkit. Picard. 2019 http://broadinstitute.github.io/picard/
  12. Burstein SM. Agatharchides of Cnidus: On the Erythraean Sea. London: Hakluyt Society; 1989. [Google Scholar]
  13. Burstein SM. In: A Tribute to Excellence: Studies Offered in Honor of Ernö GaáL, Ulrich Luft, and Lásló Török. Bács TA, editor. Budapest: Chaire d’Egyptologie de l’Université Eotvos Lorand; 2002. Kush, Axum and the ancient Indian ocean trade; pp. 127–137. [Google Scholar]
  14. Casson L. The Periplus Maris Erythraei: Text with Introduction, Translation, and Commentary. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1989. [Google Scholar]
  15. Casson L. Ptolemy II and the hunting of African elephants. Transactions of the American Philological Association. 1993;123:247–260. doi: 10.2307/284331. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Cavasin R. Tell Defenneh et la route de l’encens. Égypte Nilotique et Méditerranéenne. 2019;12:1–24. [Google Scholar]
  17. Chala D, Roos C, Svenning JC, Zinner D. Species-specific effects of climate change on the distribution of suitable baboon habitats – ecological niche modeling of current and last glacial maximum conditions. Journal of Human Evolution. 2019;132:215–226. doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2019.05.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Cooper JC. Toponymy on the Periphery: Placenames of the Eastern Desert, Red Sea, and South Sinai in Egyptian Documents from the Early Dynastic until the End of the New Kingdom. Leiden: Brill; 2020. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Dabney J, Knapp M, Glocke I, Gansauge MT, Weihmann A, Nickel B, Valdiosera C, García N, Pääbo S, Arsuaga JL, Meyer M. Complete mitochondrial genome sequence of a Middle Pleistocene cave bear reconstructed from ultrashort DNA fragments. PNAS. 2013a;110:15758–15763. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1314445110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Dabney J, Meyer M, Pääbo S. Ancient DNA damage. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology. 2013b;5:a012567. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a012567. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Dominy NJ, Ikram S, Moritz GL, Wheatley PV, Christensen JN, Chipman JW, Koch PL. Mummified baboons reveal the far reach of early Egyptian mariners. eLife. 2020;9:e60860. doi: 10.7554/eLife.60860. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Doresse J. Ethiopia. London: Elek Books; 1959. [Google Scholar]
  23. Edgar RC. MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Research. 2004;32:1792–1797. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh340. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Fattovich Egypt’s trade with Punt: new discoveries on the Red Sea coast. British Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan. 2012;18:1–59. [Google Scholar]
  25. Fattovich R. The archaeology of Punt. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology. 2018;104:205–209. doi: 10.1177/0307513319858321. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Fauvelle-Aymar FX. Les inscriptions d’Adoulis (Érythrée): fragments d’un royaume d’influence Hellénistique et Gréco-Romaine sur la côte Africaine de la mer Rouge. Bulletin de l’Institut Français D’Archéologie Orientale. 2009;109:135–160. [Google Scholar]
  27. Geraads D. Dating the northern African cercopithecid fossil record. Human Evolution. 1987;2:19–27. doi: 10.1007/BF02436528. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  28. Gippoliti S. Papio hamadryas (e.T16019A17953082). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2019. [August 23, 2022]. [DOI]
  29. Goudsmit J, Brandon-Jones D. Mummies of olive baboons and barbary macaques in the Baboon Catacomb of the sacred animal necropolis at North Saqqara. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology. 1999;85:45. doi: 10.2307/3822426. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. Hapke A, Zinner D, Zischler H. Mitochondrial DNA variation in Eritrean hamadryas baboons (Papio hamadryas hamadryas): life history influences population genetic structure. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 2001;50:483–492. doi: 10.1007/s002650100393. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  31. Hatke G. Aksum and Nubia: Warfare, Commerce, and Political Fictions in Ancient Northeast Africa. New York: New York University Press; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  32. Hill WCO. Primates: Comparative Anatomy and Taxonomy VIII. Cynopithecinae: Papio, Mandrillus, Theropithecus. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; 1970. [Google Scholar]
  33. Hoang DT, Chernomor O, von Haeseler A, Minh BQ, Vinh LS. UFBoot2: improving the ultrafast bootstrap approximation. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 2018;35:518–522. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msx281. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Hodgson JA, Sterner KN, Matthews LJ, Burrell AS, Jani RA, Raaum RL, Stewart CB, Disotell TR. Successive radiations, not stasis, in the South American primate fauna. PNAS. 2009;106:5534–5539. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0810346106. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Huelsenbeck JP, Ronquist F. MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics. 2001;17:754–755. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/17.8.754. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Jolly CJ, Ucko PJ. In: Man in Africa. Douglas M, Kaberry PM, editors. London: Tavistock; 1969. The riddle of the sphinx-monkey; pp. 319–335. [Google Scholar]
  37. Kalyaanamoorthy S, Minh BQ, Wong TKF, von Haeseler A, Jermiin LS. ModelFinder: fast model selection for accurate phylogenetic estimates. Nature Methods. 2017;14:587–589. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.4285. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Keay J. The Spice Route: A History. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2006. [Google Scholar]
  39. Kistler L, Ware R, Smith O, Collins M, Allaby RG. A new model for ancient DNA decay based on paleogenomic meta-analysis. Nucleic Acids Research. 2017;45:6310–6320. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkx361. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Kitchen KA. In: Trade and Travel in the Red Sea Region. Lunde P, Porter A, editors. Oxford: Argentum Press; 2004. The elusive land of punt Revisited; pp. 25–31. [Google Scholar]
  41. Kopp GH, Ferreira da Silva MJ, Fischer J, Brito JC, Regnaut S, Roos C, Zinner D. The influence of social systems on patterns of mitochondrial DNA variation in baboons. International Journal of Primatology. 2014a;35:210–225. doi: 10.1007/s10764-013-9725-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Kopp GH, Roos C, Butynski TM, Wildman DE, Alagaili AN, Groeneveld LF, Zinner D. Out of Africa, but how and when? The case of hamadryas baboons (Papio hamadryas) Journal of Human Evolution. 2014b;76:154–164. doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2014.08.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Korneliussen TS, Albrechtsen A, Nielsen R. ANGSD: analysis of next generation sequencing data. BMC Bioinformatics. 2014;15:356. doi: 10.1186/s12859-014-0356-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Leigh JW, Bryant D. POPART: full-feature software for haplotype network construction. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 2015;6:1110–1116. doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.12410. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  45. Li H, Durbin R. Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows-Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics. 2009;25:1754–1760. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp324. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Li H, Handsaker B, Wysoker A, Fennell T, Ruan J, Homer N, Marth G, Abecasis G, Durbin R, 1000 Genome Project Data Processing Subgroup The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics. 2009;25:2078–2079. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp352. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Lloyd AB. Necho and the Red Sea: some considerations. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology. 1977;63:142–155. doi: 10.1177/030751337706300122. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Lortet LCE, Gaillard C. La faune momifiée de l’ancienne Egypte (deuxième série) Archives Du Muséum d’histoire Naturelle de Lyon. 1907;9:1–130. doi: 10.3406/mhnly.1907.961. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Lucarini G, Barca D, Manzo A. The provenance of obsidian artefacts from the Middle Kingdom harbour of Mersa/Wadi Gawasis, Egypt, and its implications for Red Sea trade routes in the 2nd millennium BC. Quaternary International. 2020;555:85–95. doi: 10.1016/j.quaint.2020.03.015. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  50. Manzo A. In: Current Trends in Eritrean Studies. Lusini G, editor. Naples: Università degli Studi di Napoli “L’Orientale"; 2010. Adulis before Aksum? Possible 2nd and 1st millenium BC evidence from the site of the ancient port; pp. 29–42. [Google Scholar]
  51. Manzo A. In: Navigated Spaces, Connected Places. Agius DA, Cooper JP, Trakadas A, Zazzaro C, editors. Oxford: Archaeopress; 2012. Nubians and the others on the Red sea: an update on the exotic ceramic materials from the Middle Kingdom harbour of Mersa/Wadi Gawasis, Red Sea, Egypt; pp. 47–58. [Google Scholar]
  52. Massa S. In: Eritrean Heritage: Ancient Routes and Settlements. Bortolotto S, Cheli F, editors. Florence: Altralinea Edizioni; 2021. Emotion: Eritrean mobility and cultural heritage. New frontiers of the horn of Africa; pp. 47–61. [Google Scholar]
  53. Massicotte P, South A. rnaturalearth: World Map Data from Natural Earth. R Package Version 0.1.0. 2023 https://docs.ropensci.org/rnaturalearth/https://github.com/ropensci/rnaturalearth
  54. Mathieson I, Abascal F, Vinner L, Skoglund P, Pomilla C, Mitchell P, Arthur C, Gurdasani D, Willerslev E, Sandhu MS, Dewar G. An ancient baboon genome demonstrates long-term population continuity in southern Africa. Genome Biology and Evolution. 2020;12:407–412. doi: 10.1093/gbe/evaa019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Meeks D. Coptos et le chemin de Pount. Topoi. 2002;3:267–334. [Google Scholar]
  56. Meeks D. In: Mysterious Lands. O’Connor D, Quirke S, editors. London: UCL Press; 2003. Locating Punt; pp. 53–80. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  57. Munro-Hay S. The foreign trade of the Aksumite port of Adulis. Azania. 1982;17:107–125. doi: 10.1080/00672708209511302. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  58. Neukamm J, Peltzer A, Nieselt K. DamageProfiler: fast damage pattern calculation for ancient DNA. Bioinformatics. 2021;37:3652–3653. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btab190. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Nguyen L-T, Schmidt HA, von Haeseler A, Minh BQ. IQ-TREE: a fast and effective stochastic algorithm for estimating maximum-likelihood phylogenies. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 2015;32:268–274. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msu300. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Ottoni C, Guellil M, Ozga AT, Stone AC, Kersten O, Bramanti B, Porcier S, Van Neer W. Metagenomic analysis of dental calculus in ancient Egyptian baboons. Scientific Reports. 2019;9:19637. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-56074-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Peters J. In: Tuna El-Gebel –– Eine Ferne Welt: Tagungsband Zur Konferenz Der Graduate School “Distant Worlds” Vom 16. Bis 19.1.2014 in München. Flossmann-Schütze MC, Hoffmann F, editors. Vaterstetten: Patrick Brose; 2020. The allochthonous fauna of Tuna El-Gebel and its cultural implications; pp. 253–267. [Google Scholar]
  62. Phillips J. Punt and Aksum: Egypt and the Horn of Africa. Journal of African History. 1997;38:423–457. doi: 10.1017/S0021853797007068. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  63. R Development Core Team . Vienna, Austria: R foundation for statistical computing; 2022. https://www.R-project.org/ [Google Scholar]
  64. Richardin P, Porcier S, Ikram S, Louarn G, Berthet D. Cats, crocodiles, cattle, and more: Initial steps toward establishing a chronology of ancient Egyptian animal mummies. Radiocarbon. 2017;59:595–607. doi: 10.1017/RDC.2016.102. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  65. Rogers J, Raveendran M, Harris RA, Mailund T, Leppälä K, Athanasiadis G, Schierup MH, Cheng J, Munch K, Walker JA, Konkel MK, Jordan V, Steely CJ, Beckstrom TO, Bergey C, Burrell A, Schrempf D, Noll A, Kothe M, Kopp GH, Liu Y, Murali S, Billis K, Martin FJ, Muffato M, Cox L, Else J, Disotell T, Muzny DM, Phillips-Conroy J, Aken B, Eichler EE, Marques-Bonet T, Kosiol C, Batzer MA, Hahn MW, Tung J, Zinner D, Roos C, Jolly CJ, Gibbs RA, Worley KC, Baboon Genome Analysis Consortium The comparative genomics and complex population history of Papio baboons. Science Advances. 2019;5:eaau6947. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aau6947. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Rohland N, Siedel H, Hofreiter M. Nondestructive DNA extraction method for mitochondrial DNA analyses of museum specimens. BioTechniques. 2004;36:814–816. doi: 10.2144/04365ST05. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics. 2003;19:1572–1574. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btg180. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Roos C, Chuma IS, Collins DA, Knauf S, Zinner D. Complete mitochondrial genome of an olive baboon (Papio anubis) from Gombe National Park, Tanzania. Mitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources. 2018;3:177–178. doi: 10.1080/23802359.2018.1437813. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Roos C, Knauf S, Chuma IS, Maille A, Callou C, Sabin R, Portela Miguez R, Zinner D. New mitogenomic lineages in Papio baboons and their phylogeographic implications. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2021;174:407–417. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.24186. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Rossi C, Ruß-Popa G, Mattiangeli V, McDaid F, Hare AJ, Davoudi H, Laleh H, Lorzadeh Z, Khazaeli R, Fathi H, Teasdale MD, A’ali A, Stöllner T, Mashkour M, Daly KG. Exceptional ancient DNA preservation and fibre remains of a Sasanian saltmine sheep mummy in Chehrābād, Iran. Biology Letters. 2021;17:20210222. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2021.0222. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Schubert M, Ginolhac A, Lindgreen S, Thompson JF, Al-Rasheid KAS, Willerslev E, Krogh A, Orlando L. Improving ancient DNA read mapping against modern reference genomes. BMC Genomics. 2012;13:178. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-13-178. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Schuenemann VJ, Peltzer A, Welte B, van Pelt WP, Molak M, Wang C-C, Furtwängler A, Urban C, Reiter E, Nieselt K, Teßmann B, Francken M, Harvati K, Haak W, Schiffels S, Krause J. Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods. Nature Communications. 2017;8:15694. doi: 10.1038/ncomms15694. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Seland EH. The Indian Ocean and the globalisation of the ancient world. Ancient West & East. 2008;7:67–79. doi: 10.2143/AWE.7.0.2033253. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  74. Shapiro B, Hofreiter M. Ancient DNA: Methods and Protocols. New York: Springer; 2012. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  75. Sithaldeen R. Papio ursinus (e.T16022A168568698). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2019. [August 23, 2022]. [DOI]
  76. Sleeswyk AW. On the location of the land of Pwnt on two Renaissance maps. International Journal of Nautical Archaeology. 1983;12:279–291. doi: 10.1111/j.1095-9270.1983.tb01161.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  77. Sørensen EF, Harris RA, Zhang L, Raveendran M, Kuderna LFK, Walker JA, Storer JM, Kuhlwilm M, Fontsere C, Seshadri L, Bergey CM, Burrell AS, Bergman J, Phillips-Conroy JE, Shiferaw F, Chiou KL, Chuma IS, Keyyu JD, Fischer J, Gingras MC, Salvi S, Doddapaneni H, Schierup MH, Batzer MA, Jolly CJ, Knauf S, Zinner D, Farh KKH, Marques-Bonet T, Munch K, Roos C, Rogers J. Genome-wide coancestry reveals details of ancient and recent male-driven reticulation in baboons. Science. 2023;380:eabn8153. doi: 10.1126/science.abn8153. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Städele V, Van Doren V, Pines M, Swedell L, Vigilant L. Fine-scale genetic assessment of sex-specific dispersal patterns in a multilevel primate society. Journal of Human Evolution. 2015;78:103–113. doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2014.10.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. Stadler MA. Thoth. UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology. 2012;1:1 [Google Scholar]
  80. Tallet P. Deux notes sur les expéditions au pays de Pount à la lumière de nouvelles données archéologiques. Revue d’Égyptologie. 2013;64:189–209. [Google Scholar]
  81. Tamura K, Nei M. Estimation of the number of nucleotide substitutions in the control region of mitochondrial DNA in humans and chimpanzees. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 1993;10:512–526. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a040023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. Tavaré S. Some probabilistic and statistical problems in the analysis of DNA sequences. Lectures on Mathematics in the Life Sciences. 1986;17:57–86. [Google Scholar]
  83. Trifinopoulos J, Nguyen L-T, von Haeseler A, Minh BQ. W-IQ-TREE: a fast online phylogenetic tool for maximum likelihood analysis. Nucleic Acids Research. 2016;44:W232–W235. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw256. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  84. Van Neer W, Linseele V, Friedman RF. In: Egypt at Its Origins: Studies in Memory of Barbara Adams. Hendrickx S, Friedman RF, Cialowicz KM, Chlodnicki M, editors. Leuven: Peeters; 2004. Animal burials and food offerings at the Elite Cemetery Hk6 of Hierakonpolis; pp. 67–129. [Google Scholar]
  85. von den Driesch A, Kessler D, Peters J. In: Documenta Archaeobiologiae 2: Conservation Policy and Current Research. Grupe G, Peters J, editors. Rahden: Verlag Marie Leidorf; 2004. Mummified Baboons and other primates from the Saitic-Ptolemaic animal necropolis of Tuna el-Gebel, Middle Egypt; pp. 231–278. [Google Scholar]
  86. Wallis J, Alonso C, Silva MJ, Hernansaiz G, Vale C, Zinner D. Papio papio (e.T16018A17952926). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2020. [August 23, 2022]. [DOI]
  87. Wallis J. Papio anubis (e.T40647A17953200). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2020a. [August 23, 2022]. [DOI]
  88. Wallis J. Papio cynocephalus (e.T92250442A92251260). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2020b. [August 23, 2022]. [DOI]
  89. Wallis J, Petersdorf M, Weyher AH, Jolly CJ. Papio kindae (e.T136848A190319676). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2021. [August 23, 2022]. [DOI]
  90. Wilkinson JG. Topography of Thebes, and General View of Egypt: Being a Short Account of the Principal Objects Worthy of Notice in the Valley of the Nile. London: Murray; 1853. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  91. Winney BJ, Hammond RL, Macasero W, Flores B, Boug A, Biquand V, Biquand S, Bruford MW. Crossing the Red Sea: phylogeography of the hamadryas baboon, Papio hamadryas hamadryas. Molecular Ecology. 2004;13:2819–2827. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02288.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  92. Yu G, Smith DK, Zhu H, Guan Y, Lam TTY. GGTREE: an R package for visualization and annotation of phylogenetic trees with their covariates and other associated data. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 2017;8:28–36. doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.12628. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  93. Zazzaro C, Cocca E, Manzo A. Towards a chronology of the Eritrean Red Sea port of Adulis (1st – early 7th century AD) Journal of African Archaeology. 2014;12:43–73. doi: 10.3213/2191-5784-10253. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  94. Zinner D, Groeneveld LF, Keller C, Roos C. Mitochondrial phylogeography of baboons (Papio spp.): indication for introgressive hybridization? BMC Evolutionary Biology. 2009;9:83. doi: 10.1186/1471-2148-9-83. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  95. Zinner D, Buba U, Roos C. In: Primates of Gashaka: Socioecology and Conservation in Nigeria’s Biodiversity Hotspot. Sommer V, Roos C, editors. New York: Springer; 2011. Pan-African voyagers: the phylogeography of baboons; pp. 267–307. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  96. Zinner D, Wertheimer J, Liedigk R, Groeneveld LF, Roos C. Baboon phylogeny as inferred from complete mitochondrial genomes. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 2013;150:133–140. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.22185. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  97. Zinner D, Keller C, Nyahongo JW, Butynski TM, Jong YA, Pozzi L, Knauf S, Liedigk R, Roos C. Distribution of mitochondrial clades and morphotypes of baboons Papio spp. Journal of East African Natural History. 2015;104:143–168. doi: 10.2982/028.104.0111. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Editor's evaluation

Ammie K Kalan 1

This fundamental Research Advance sheds new light on the ancient baboon trade in the Red Sea. Combining ancient DNA methods from a mummified baboon with historical accounts, this work provides compelling evidence connecting the ancient Egyptian trade of baboons with the ancient port city of Adulis. The results will be of significance to a broad range of scholars interested in applying ancient DNA to improve our knowledge of historical events.

Decision letter

Editor: Ammie K Kalan1
Reviewed by: Julien Cooper2

Our editorial process produces two outputs: (i) public reviews designed to be posted alongside the preprint for the benefit of readers; (ii) feedback on the manuscript for the authors, including requests for revisions, shown below. We also include an acceptance summary that explains what the editors found interesting or important about the work.

Decision letter after peer review:

Thank you for submitting your article "Adulis and the transshipment of baboons during classical antiquity" for consideration by eLife. Your article has been reviewed by 2 peer reviewers, and the evaluation has been overseen by a Reviewing Editor and Christian Rutz as the Senior Editor. The following individuals involved in review of your submission have agreed to reveal their identity: Julien Cooper (Reviewer #1).

The reviewers have discussed their reviews with one another, and the Reviewing Editor has drafted this to help you prepare a revised submission.

Essential revisions:

The main points for revision concern:

1) clarifying the geographic range attributed in the abstract (and throughout the article) for the provenance of the mummified baboon. Please check/ clarify that Adulis port is inferred from historical accounts and location is more generally coastal Eritrea/eastern Sudan.

2) provide DNA contamination estimates based on the mismatch between reads and the consensus sequence for the historical baboon samples as well for the mummified one. It was also recommended that contamination estimates be restricted to transversions for the mummified baboon. (see Reviewer #2's comments for further clarification).

Reviewer #1 (Recommendations for the authors):

I congratulate the authors on this study, this is a solid argument for connecting the Egyptian baboon trade with Eritrea and the authors are able to link this convincingly with the wider Punt debate. The language is carefully worded and provides an accurate assessment of the significance of their findings.

At the outset, it should be noted that as an Egyptologist I am not in a position to comment on the genetic analysis in this paper.

l. 62: small points. The word is Geʽez with the apostrophe facing the other direction (this is a different sound). The other point is that the Monumentum Adulitanum was written in Greek and I know of no scholar that suggests it was written in Ge'ez. There Aksumite stele like this one which have parallel Greek and Ge'ez scripts, but Cosmas did not copy any Ge'ez text nor mention one in his account as far as I am aware. One may have existed but I would just mention the Greek in this text as a Ge'ez is unknowable.

L. 126: Usually put the percentage after the date range for calibrated dates.

L. 408. "Gawasis".

L. 409: perhaps change slightly as what you describe below shows that Egyptians did go to Punt. i.e. "there are only scant and disconnected records of Egyptians in Punt" or alike.

L. 436: While the Defenneh Stele is the last expedition text to mention Punt, there are plenty of references to Punt in Greco-Roman religious texts. Perhaps say "span that coincides with the last known expeditionary records for Punt voyages" (or alike).

L. 442: More of an optional thing to mention; a few scholars (Conti Rossini; de Romanis) have tried to connect one of the Puntite toponyms in the topographical lists with Adulis, but the phonetics for this equation are far from certain and probably incorrect, see Cooper, Toponymy on the Periphery, 346.

Reviewer #2 (Recommendations for the authors):

1) My only real technical suggestion is that at least for the mummified baboon, the authors assess and report contamination by looking at mismatch in the mapped mitochondrial reads (particularly at sites known to vary between clades). The concern would be contamination from other baboon samples during either archaeological handling or in the lab.

2) I suggest making it clearer in the abstract that the link to Adulis is quite speculative and that the possible geographic area is not just Eritria but extends well into present-day Sudan and Ethiopia.

3) If I understand correctly the authors do have nuclear data from the shotgun sequencing. I understand it's very low coverage and they might not want to analyze it, but I just want to make sure that they are releasing it freely in case others want to.

eLife. 2023 Sep 28;12:e87513. doi: 10.7554/eLife.87513.sa2

Author response

Essential revisions:

The main points for revision concern:

1) clarifying the geographic range attributed in the abstract (and throughout the article) for the provenance of the mummified baboon. Please check/ clarify that Adulis port is inferred from historical accounts and location is more generally coastal Eritrea/eastern Sudan.

2) provide DNA contamination estimates based on the mismatch between reads and the consensus sequence for the historical baboon samples as well for the mummified one. It was also recommended that contamination estimates be restricted to transversions for the mummified baboon. (see Reviewer #2's comments for further clarification).

We thank the editors and reviewers for their thoughtful comments and suggestions, we have addressed all recommendations to improve our manuscript. We also slightly changed the structure of the manuscript following the comments of the editorial support. In particular, we have (1) edited the text to more clearly mirror the uncertainty in the geographical assignment of the mummified baboon (#Rev2.2) and (2) included an additional analysis to estimate contamination in the mummified sample based on mismatches between reads and the consensus sequence in comparison to the historical samples (#Rev2.1). Please find our detailed responses to the reviewers’ recommendations below.

Reviewer #1 (Recommendations for the authors):

I congratulate the authors on this study, this is a solid argument for connecting the Egyptian baboon trade with Eritrea and the authors are able to link this convincingly with the wider Punt debate. The language is carefully worded and provides an accurate assessment of the significance of their findings.

At the outset, it should be noted that as an Egyptologist I am not in a position to comment on the genetic analysis in this paper.

l. 62: small points. The word is Geʽez with the apostrophe facing the other direction (this is a different sound). The other point is that the Monumentum Adulitanum was written in Greek and I know of no scholar that suggests it was written in Ge'ez. There Aksumite stele like this one which have parallel Greek and Ge'ez scripts, but Cosmas did not copy any Ge'ez text nor mention one in his account as far as I am aware. One may have existed but I would just mention the Greek in this text as a Ge'ez is unknowable.

We thank Dr. Cooper for catching this error. It has been corrected. (L.65)

L. 126: Usually put the percentage after the date range for calibrated dates.

We thank Dr. Cooper for catching this lapse. The sentence has been edited to the following:

“L. 125-127: Now accessioned in the Musée des Confluences, Lyon, France, the linen wrapping of one mummified individual (MHNL 90001206) was dated radiometrically to 803-544 cal. BC (95.4%) (Richardin et al., 2017).”

L. 408. "Gawasis".

We thank Dr. Cooper for catching this typographical error. It has been corrected (L.467).

L. 409: perhaps change slightly as what you describe below shows that Egyptians did go to Punt. i.e. "there are only scant and disconnected records of Egyptians in Punt" or alike.

Agreed, the sentence has been edited to the following:

“L.467-470: Discovered at Mersa Gawasis, a Middle Kingdom harbour, these artifacts appear to align the prehistory of Adulis with the fabled Land of Punt (Bard & Fattovich, 2018; Manzo, 2010, 2012), an enigmatic toponym scattered across scant and disconnected records (Cooper, 2020).”

L. 436: While the Defenneh Stele is the last expedition text to mention Punt, there are plenty of references to Punt in Greco-Roman religious texts. Perhaps say "span that coincides with the last known expeditionary records for Punt voyages" (or alike).

Agreed, the sentence has been edited to the following:

“L.493-495. Here, we used aDNA to show that at least one baboon from the 25th Dynasty or Late Period of Egyptian history––a span that coincides with the last known expeditions to Punt, but predates Greco-Roman accounts of Adulis as a source of baboons––can be traced to Eritrea.”

L. 442: More of an optional thing to mention; a few scholars (Conti Rossini; de Romanis) have tried to connect one of the Puntite toponyms in the topographical lists with Adulis, but the phonetics for this equation are far from certain and probably incorrect, see Cooper, Toponymy on the Periphery, 346.

We appreciate this suggestion, and we agree with Cooper’s assessment, but we would rather not wade into this tangential topic.

Reviewer #2 (Recommendations for the authors):

1) My only real technical suggestion is that at least for the mummified baboon, the authors assess and report contamination by looking at mismatch in the mapped mitochondrial reads (particularly at sites known to vary between clades). The concern would be contamination from other baboon samples during either archaeological handling or in the lab.

We thank you for this suggestion and added the assessment. We included a figure, which shows the (mis)matches of the mapped reads from the mummified baboon at sites in the mitogenome that (i) are distinct (fixed differences) between north-eastern subclades (125 sites), and (ii) are fixed in subclade G3-Y (when considering all samples but the mummified baboon) but differ in the consensus sequence of the mummified baboon (37 sites). These results show that mapped reads agree to a very large degree ((i) median 99.2%, IQR 1.6%; (ii) median 97.3%, IQR 3.1%) and there is no evidence for significant amounts of contamination. We changed the respective parts in the methods, results, discussion, and supplement accordingly:

Methods L. 604-607: “We assessed contamination by checking mismatches of the mapped reads from the mummified sample at sites in the mitogenome that (i) are distinct between north-eastern subclades (125 fixed differences), and (ii) are fixed in subclade G3-Y (considering all samples but the mummified baboon) but differ in the consensus sequence of the mummified sample (37 sites).”

Results L. 327-342: “Mapped reads of the mummified sample agreed to median of 99.2% (IQR 1.6%) when focussing on the 125 sites that exhibited fixed differences between subclades and differed at three sites from the variant found in its subclade (Figure 7a). When focussing on the 37 sites that are fixed in the subclade of attribution of the mummified baboon but differed in its consensus sequence, mapped reads agreed to a median of 97.3% (IQR 3.1%) (Figure 7b).”

Discussion L411-413: “The very low frequency of mismatches in the mapped reads from the mummified sample and its unique sequence are further evidence against the concern of contamination from other baboon samples.”

2) I suggest making it clearer in the abstract that the link to Adulis is quite speculative and that the possible geographic area is not just Eritria but extends well into present-day Sudan and Ethiopia.

We agree, and we have edited the abstract carefully, including Ethiopia and using the words “corroborates” and “pointing toward” to express uncertainty:

“L. 42-46: Phylogenetic assignment connects the mummified baboon to modern populations of Papio hamadryas in Eritrea, Ethiopia, and eastern Sudan. This result, assuming geographical stability of phylogenetic clades, corroborates Greco-Roman historiographies by pointing toward present-day Eritrea, and by extension Adulis, as a source of baboons for Late Period Egyptians.”

3) If I understand correctly the authors do have nuclear data from the shotgun sequencing. I understand it's very low coverage and they might not want to analyze it, but I just want to make sure that they are releasing it freely in case others want to.

We agree, and we have made all raw data (including shotgun sequencing reads) openly available in public repositories: European Nucleotide Archive (ENA), project accession no. PRJEB60261. See L.638-642 “Data access”.

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Data Citations

    1. Kopp GH. 2023. Adulis and the transshipment of baboons during classical antiquity. Open Science Framework. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
    2. Kopp GH. 2023. Adulis and the transshipment of baboons during classical antiquity. European Nucleotide Archive. PRJEB60261 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
    3. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio anubis isolate mitoclade G3-Y voucher Z-MAM-000584 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538075
    4. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher Z-MAM-001034 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538076
    5. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio anubis isolate mitoclade J voucher Z-MAM-000583 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538077
    6. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer Z, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher Z-MAM-000960 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538078
    7. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher ZMB_Mam-025647 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538079
    8. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher MO-1972-357 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538080
    9. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Y voucher Z-MAM-001288 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538081
    10. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Y voucher Z-MAM-007509 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538082
    11. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas voucher 51000172 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538083
    12. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Z voucher ZMB_Mam-042543 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538084
    13. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Z voucher ZMB_Mam-074849 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538085
    14. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Z voucher MO-1972-359 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538086
    15. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio anubis isolate mitoclade J voucher Z-MAM-032128 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538087
    16. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio cynocephalus voucher ZM-MO-1977-5 mitochondrion, partial genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538088
    17. Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher ZMB_Mam_012808 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538089

    Supplementary Materials

    Supplementary file 1. Overview of analysed samples and sequencing results (provided as .csv).
    elife-87513-supp1.csv (9.6KB, csv)
    MDAR checklist
    elife-87513-mdarchecklist1.pdf (189KB, pdf)

    Data Availability Statement

    Raw sequencing data are deposited in the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA, project accession no. PRJEB60261), mitochondrial genomes on Genbank (accession numbers: OQ538075-OQ538089). Code used for data processing and analysis is available on OSF via https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/D5GX3.

    The following datasets were generated:

    Kopp GH. 2023. Adulis and the transshipment of baboons during classical antiquity. Open Science Framework.

    Kopp GH. 2023. Adulis and the transshipment of baboons during classical antiquity. European Nucleotide Archive. PRJEB60261

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio anubis isolate mitoclade G3-Y voucher Z-MAM-000584 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538075

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher Z-MAM-001034 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538076

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio anubis isolate mitoclade J voucher Z-MAM-000583 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538077

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer Z, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher Z-MAM-000960 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538078

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher ZMB_Mam-025647 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538079

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher MO-1972-357 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538080

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Y voucher Z-MAM-001288 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538081

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Y voucher Z-MAM-007509 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538082

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas voucher 51000172 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538083

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Z voucher ZMB_Mam-042543 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538084

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Z voucher ZMB_Mam-074849 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538085

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-Z voucher MO-1972-359 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538086

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio anubis isolate mitoclade J voucher Z-MAM-032128 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538087

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio cynocephalus voucher ZM-MO-1977-5 mitochondrion, partial genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538088

    Grathwol F, Roos C, Zinner D, Hume B, Porcier SM, Berthet D, Cuisin J, Merker S, Ottoni C, Van Neer W, Dominy NJ, Kopp GH. 2023. Papio hamadryas isolate mitoclade G3-X voucher ZMB_Mam_012808 mitochondrion, complete genome. NCBI GenBank. OQ538089

    Articles from eLife are provided here courtesy of eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd

    RESOURCES