Ancient genomes illuminate Eastern Arabian population history and adapt. ag. malaria

[RCO]

Ancient genomes illuminate Eastern Arabian population history and adaptation against malaria

Authors: Rui Martiniano*#1, Marc Haber2§, Mohamed A. Almarri3,4§, Valeria Mattiangeli5 , Mirte C. M. Kuijpers6 , Berenice Chamel7 , Emily M. Breslin5 , Judith Littleton8 , Salman Almahari9 , Fatima Aloraifi10, Daniel G. Bradley5 , Pierre Lombard7,9, Richard Durbin*11

Abstract The harsh climate of Arabia has posed challenges in generating ancient DNA from the region, hindering the direct examination of ancient genomes for understanding the demographic processes that shaped Arabian populations. In this study, we report whole genome sequence data obtained from four Tylos-period individuals from Bahrain. Their genetic ancestry can be modelled as a mixture of sources from ancient Anatolia, Levant and Iran/Caucasus, with variation between individuals suggesting population heterogeneity in Bahrain before the onset of Islam. We identify the G6PD Mediterranean mutation associated with malaria-resistance in three out of four ancient Bahraini samples and estimate that it rose in frequency in Eastern Arabia from 5-6 kya onwards, around the time agriculture appeared in the region. Our study provides the first characterisation of the genetic composition of ancient Arabians, shedding light on the population history of Bahrain and demonstrating the feasibility of aDNA studies in the region.

bioRxiv preprint  - doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.10.01.559299

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...1.full.pdf

[Qrts]

Essentially these samples are genetically Mesopotamians who largely resemble the older Nemrik LBA and DinkhaTepe_BIA_A samples from the Southern arc study, albeit with some extra contribution.

In this model, the Bahrain_Tylos samples present similar ancestry proportions to AZE_ChL, Mesopotamia_PPN and IRQ_Nemrik9_LBA, IRN_Dinkha_Tepe_A, LBN_IA and to ARM_Aknashen_N.

Two samples seem to have post-Neolithic Iranian input proxied by Hajji Firuz IA, while one (MH3_LT) has input from a Bronze age Levantine source proxied by Sidon_MBA:

The three Late Tylos individuals descend from admixture between the earliest sample AS_EMT and other sources, with MH1 and MH2_LT having an additional pulse of post-Neolithic Iranian-related ancestry, here represented by IRN_Hajji_Firuz_IA, whereas the MH3_LT sample received additional ancestry associated with the Levant, represented by LBN_Canaanite from Sidon.

Finally, they're more similar and bear more affinity to present-day Levantines than to Arabians or South Asians:

the temporally aware model-based clustering analysis (Figure 1B) suggests that Tylos period Bahrain samples are more similar to present-day Levantine groups than to present-day Arabians or South Asians

Haplogroups:

[Jerome]

Essentially these samples are genetically Mesopotamians who largely resemble the older Nemrik LBA and DinkhaTepe_BIA_A samples from the Southern arc study, albeit with some extra contribution.

In this model, the Bahrain_Tylos samples present similar ancestry proportions to AZE_ChL, Mesopotamia_PPN and IRQ_Nemrik9_LBA, IRN_Dinkha_Tepe_A, LBN_IA and to ARM_Aknashen_N.

Two samples seem to have post-Neolithic Iranian input proxied by Hajji Firuz IA, while one (MH3_LT) has input from a Bronze age Levantine source proxied by Sidon_MBA:

The three Late Tylos individuals descend from admixture between the earliest sample AS_EMT and other sources, with MH1 and MH2_LT having an additional pulse of post-Neolithic Iranian-related ancestry, here represented by IRN_Hajji_Firuz_IA, whereas the MH3_LT sample received additional ancestry associated with the Levant, represented by LBN_Canaanite from Sidon.

Finally, they're more similar and bear more affinity to present-day Levantines than to Arabians or South Asians:

the temporally aware model-based clustering analysis (Figure 1B) suggests that Tylos period Bahrain samples are more similar to present-day Levantine groups than to present-day Arabians or South Asians

Haplogroups:

So,was the dispersal of Ydna J and T in Gulf Arabia directly from Mesopotamia/iran or through levantine intermediaries?

Also,they should have used seh_gabi_c(Ubaid) instead of arm_n or aze_ln.

The type of Ancestry which would have reached gulf would be similar to sehGabi instead of ANF rich northern arm_n/aze_ln.

Wasn't Bahrain supposed to be dilmun?
The people there turned out to be Mesopotamians?

Also,one last question,what about umm-an-nar/hili of bronze age UAE?
Anthropologically,they seem to have been quite tall similar to Ubaid skeletons

What about them?
Were they locals or ubaidians?

[Strabo]

Essentially these samples are genetically Mesopotamians who largely resemble the older Nemrik LBA and DinkhaTepe_BIA_A samples from the Southern arc study, albeit with some extra contribution.

In this model, the Bahrain_Tylos samples present similar ancestry proportions to AZE_ChL, Mesopotamia_PPN and IRQ_Nemrik9_LBA, IRN_Dinkha_Tepe_A, LBN_IA and to ARM_Aknashen_N.

Two samples seem to have post-Neolithic Iranian input proxied by Hajji Firuz IA, while one (MH3_LT) has input from a Bronze age Levantine source proxied by Sidon_MBA:

The three Late Tylos individuals descend from admixture between the earliest sample AS_EMT and other sources, with MH1 and MH2_LT having an additional pulse of post-Neolithic Iranian-related ancestry, here represented by IRN_Hajji_Firuz_IA, whereas the MH3_LT sample received additional ancestry associated with the Levant, represented by LBN_Canaanite from Sidon.

Finally, they're more similar and bear more affinity to present-day Levantines than to Arabians or South Asians:

the temporally aware model-based clustering analysis (Figure 1B) suggests that Tylos period Bahrain samples are more similar to present-day Levantine groups than to present-day Arabians or South Asians

Haplogroups:

If they are genetically (ancient) Mesopotamians but closest resemble modern day levantines, is that because modern day levantines received an influx of  (ancient) Mesopotamian ancestry after Dilmun times? Why are they not similar to modern day Mesopotamians?

[ilabv]

Are they Levantine migrants perhaps? Or descendants of some kind of 'pure' Akkadian/Babylonian/Chaldean population that survived into those times?

[Qrts]

So,was the dispersal of Ydna J and T in Gulf Arabia directly from Mesopotamia/iran or through levantine intermediaries?

Also,they should have used seh_gabi_c(Ubaid) instead of arm_n or aze_ln.

The type of Ancestry which would have reached gulf would be similar to sehGabi instead of ANF rich northern arm_n/aze_ln.

Wasn't Bahrain supposed to be dilmun?
The people there turned out to be Mesopotamians?

Also,one last question,what about umm-an-nar/hili of bronze age UAE?
Anthropologically,they seem to have been quite tall similar to Ubaid skeletons

What about them?
Were they locals or ubaidians?

The dispersal of J and T can't be simply solved with these samples from the Tylos period. Essentially the study implies these samples are most similar to the DinkhaTepe_A cluster (who originate in upper Mesopotamia), this similarity can be either very ancient or recent. The most plausible scenario is likely a post-Ur III migration which brought Akkadian types into Bahrain. Therefore early Dilmun is still very much an enigma.

As for Ubaid in Eastern Arabia (including Umm an-Nar), it's a bit more complex. The case is similar to Iraq, since in all likeliness that area probably had types similar to Iran_N groups from the Ice age refugia period, and so they may have not been demographically replaced by the later Ubaid.

[Qrts]

If they are genetically (ancient) Mesopotamians but closest resemble modern day levantines, is that because modern day levantines received an influx of  (ancient) Mesopotamian ancestry after Dilmun times? Why are they not similar to modern day Mesopotamians?

The most likely cause of this is the already close affinity between Bronze age Levantines and DinkhaTepeA. That being said I have hypothesized about Mesopotamian input in present day Levantines, a sound argument for it might be needed to further the case. A guess is that this took place before the 1st century CE and before the big population expansion in the Levant.

Regarding modern day Meospotamians - they actually are similar, and the Iranian-admixed samples can be used to model modern day non-Arab Mesopotamian groups (p.s not all Arabs are dissimilar to these groups). Essentially the main difference between modern day Assyrians and MLBA Mesopotamians is BA Armenian and post-Babylonian Iranian input. They included dating of the admixture for these Bahraini samples: ranging from Achaemenid to Parthian period.

[Qrts]

Are they Levantine migrants perhaps? Or descendants of some kind of 'pure' Akkadian/Babylonian/Chaldean population that survived into those times?

Not Levantine, these are solidly similar to Mesopotamian groups. Both groups are very similar but can be differntiated on a simple PCA. They could be Akkadian migrants from post-Ur III Sumerian downfall or post-Achaemenid refugees.

[Jerome]

What's interesting is that Qatar Neolithic study will also come out later too,with samples from 5000 BC to late antiquity.
One of the samples from that study is a 178 cm tall woman from a Qatar site associated with Ubaid.
Should be pretty interesting to see her ancestry composition.

Actually,the whole eastern gulf coast seems to have various sites associated with Ubaid.

All of this is quite interesting and surprising,modern Gulf arabs could have entered the area much later.
This isn't something people ever imagined.

[Jerome]

Are they Levantine migrants perhaps? Or descendants of some kind of 'pure' Akkadian/Babylonian/Chaldean population that survived into those times?

Not Levantine, these are solidly similar to Mesopotamian groups. Both groups are very similar but can be differntiated on a simple PCA. They could be Akkadian migrants from post-Ur III Sumerian downfall or post-Achaemenid refugees.

Wasn't dilmunite an east Semitic language?
They should be pretty similar to akkadians and the ebla sample anyways.

The real question is who were the people there before east Semitic entered from syro-mesopotamia, obviously.

Ubaidians/SehGabi_c should make most sense.

It's also unanswered whether the Ubaid-associated people simply adopted east Semitic as demic diffusion/cultural diffusion or was there population replacement/ancestry addition.

[Gene188288]

What's interesting is that Qatar Neolithic study will also come out later too,with samples from 5000 BC to late antiquity.
One of the samples from that study is a 178 cm tall woman from a Qatar site associated with Ubaid.
Should be pretty interesting to see her ancestry composition.

Actually,the whole eastern gulf coast seems to have various sites associated with Ubaid.

All of this is quite interesting and surprising,modern Gulf arabs could have entered the area much later.
This isn't something people ever imagined.

I mentioned this a while go about the gulf Arabs coming much later. We also have one more study from Saudi Arabia coming

[Qrts]

What's interesting is that Qatar Neolithic study will also come out later too,with samples from 5000 BC to late antiquity.
One of the samples from that study is a 178 cm tall woman from a Qatar site associated with Ubaid.
Should be pretty interesting to see her ancestry composition.

Actually,the whole eastern gulf coast seems to have various sites associated with Ubaid.

All of this is quite interesting and surprising,modern Gulf arabs could have entered the area much later.
This isn't something people ever imagined.

Many of the major sites in that region seem to have been abandoned and resettled later in the Iron age, so it's not totally surprising.

[Qrts]

Are they Levantine migrants perhaps? Or descendants of some kind of 'pure' Akkadian/Babylonian/Chaldean population that survived into those times?

Not Levantine, these are solidly similar to Mesopotamian groups. Both groups are very similar but can be differntiated on a simple PCA. They could be Akkadian migrants from post-Ur III Sumerian downfall or post-Achaemenid refugees.

Wasn't dilmunite an east Semitic language?
They should be pretty similar to akkadians and the ebla sample anyways.

The real question is who were the people there before east Semitic entered from syro-mesopotamia, obviously.

Ubaidians/SehGabi_c should make most sense.

It's also unanswered whether the Ubaid-associated people simply adopted east Semitic as demic diffusion/cultural diffusion or was there population replacement/ancestry addition.

East Semitic speakers in Dilmun won't be reprsentative of Ubaid-associated groups of course. Seh Gabi C is only one part of the larger genetic composition of Ubaid, only representative of migrants from the east. Mesopotamia wasn't empty. Some sites in Eastern Arabia attest to an Ice age population refugia so we need to take that into account as well.

Regarding East Semitic languages it's fairly safe to rule out demic diffusion in Mesopotamia. What likely happened was after the fall of Ur III ("Neo-Sumerian Empire"), Akkadian migrants moved en masse into the remaining Sumerian urban centers and became so demographically prominent that a bilingual phase (Sumerian-Akkadian) ensued until Sumerian eventually became extinct.

Sumerians were clearly aware of cultural differences between them and Semitic-speakers (including Amorites). Usually entire cultures don't adopt languages out of thin air, especially not when the two cultures are competing for hegemony over central and southern Mesopotamia.
The case is somewhat similar to the adoption of Arabic in the Levant - administration but most crucially religion & the pre-Islamic Arab communities in the Levant had a major role in the adoption of Arabic as the lingua france, after a long bilingual phase of Aramaic & Arabic that is.

[Jerome]

What's interesting is that Qatar Neolithic study will also come out later too,with samples from 5000 BC to late antiquity.
One of the samples from that study is a 178 cm tall woman from a Qatar site associated with Ubaid.
Should be pretty interesting to see her ancestry composition.

Actually,the whole eastern gulf coast seems to have various sites associated with Ubaid.

All of this is quite interesting and surprising,modern Gulf arabs could have entered the area much later.
This isn't something people ever imagined.

Many of the major sites in that region seem to have been abandoned and resettled later in the Iron age, so it's not totally surprising.

Hey,QRTS,I have PMed you about a request.
Could you check it please?

[Jerome]

Some sites in Eastern Arabia attest to an Ice age population refugia so we need to take that into account as well.

Interesting,could you mention some studies or reports on this?
I feel the need to read a bit more about it.

And ice age refugium=LGM/Post LGM?

Were they associated with gulf Arab inland industries or zarzian/badarositan?