The technological advancements and economic concerns that followed World War II led European countries, especially those holding territories in Africa, to invest in oceanographic research in Africa, as demonstrated by expeditions like those of the Danish “Atlantide” (1945–1946) and the Belgian “Noordende III” (1948–1949). It is in this context that Portugal also initiated the systematic study of marine resources in its African colonies in the mid-20^th century (Frade 1950; Malheiro do Vale 1953b; Vilela 1953a).

In 1948, the Missão de Estudos de Pesca was created within the Junta das Missões Geográficas e de Investigações Coloniais (Ministério das Colónias 1948), with the primary objective of providing scientific guidance for fishing activities and improving the efficient exploitation of colonial resources. For several reasons, the works planned for this mission were never initiated and, in 1951, it was restructured into the Missão de Estudos de Pesca de Angola (MEPA) [Fisheries Research Mission of Angola] (Ministério das Colónias 1951), which, contrarily to the former Mission, was geographically limited to Angola. After two campaigns in Angola, the MEPA was replaced by the Missão de Biologia Marítima (MBM) [Marine Biology Mission] in 1953 (Ministério do Ultramar 1953). Contrasting with the first restructuring (1951), this transformation into MBM expanded the geographical scope of the mission to other Portuguese colonies. The main objectives of the MBM were to conduct fundamental research to study the biology of marine species of economic interest, to contribute to the development of fisheries and related industry and to collect botanical and zoological material to produce an inventory of marine species.

The first MBM campaign took place in Angola in 1955 and it was followed by several others in Angola, Cabo Verde and Mozambique over the span of a decade. Further work in other Portuguese colonies was also initiated or planned, namely in Guinea-Bissau, Timor-Leste and São Tomé e Príncipe, but due to a shortage of human and material resources, fieldwork was largely limited to Angola from 1960 onwards. The growth of the collections gathered by the missions precipitated the creation of the Centro de Biologia Piscatória (CBP) in 1959, an organism of the Junta de Investigações do Ultramar, responsible for receiving, maintaining and studying this material (Ministério do Ultramar 1959). The CBP incorporated the MBM as its main instrument and another restructuring of the MBM into the Missão de Biologia Piscatória do Ultramar [Mission for Overseas Fisheries Biology] was planned, but yet never formalised (Ministério do Ultramar 1959).

With the intention of differentiating fundamental biological research from that applied to fisheries and industry, the CBP and the MBM were finally dissolved in 1966 and replaced by the newly-created Centro de Biologia Aquática Tropical (CBAT) and Centro de Bioceanologia e Pescas do Ultramar (CBPU) (Ministério do Ultramar 1966). While the former was tasked with fundamental biological research and incorporated the CBP and MBM staff and collections, the latter assumed the responsibility for all technological research applied to fisheries and the coordination of the newly-created Missões de Estudos Bioceanológicos e de Pescas [Missions for Bioceanological and Fisheries Studies] in Angola and Mozambique.

In the context of the independence of the colonies, in 1974, both the CBAT and CBPU were dissolved and their duties transferred to the Direcção-Geral da Investigação e Protecção dos Recursos Vivos e do Ambiente Aquático, Secretaria de Estado das Pescas (Ministério da Economia 1974). A period of institutional restructurings followed and the CBAT collections and researchers were eventually integrated into the Instituto Nacional de Investigação das Pescas (INIP), created in 1977 in the Ministério da Agricultura e Pescas (Ministério da Agricultura e Pescas 1977) and precursor of the present-day Instituto Português do Mar e Atmosfera (IPMA). In 1984, by initiative of Maria Helena Barahona Fernandes (1946–2005), Portuguese biologist and president of the INIP at the time, the bulk of zoological collections from former colonial territories were donated to Museu Bocage (MB), presently integrated into the Museu Nacional de História Natural e da Ciência, Universidade de Lisboa (MNHNC), where they are still preserved.

Several difficulties were found in the recruitment of qualified researchers to develop the work planned for the MEPA campaigns (Vilela 1953a). On account of this, the scientific staff for the first campaign was limited to the German researcher Wilhelm Nümann (1906–1999), who was employed as supervisor and the Portuguese researcher Herculano Zacarias Vilela (1908–?) (Fig. 1A). Nümann’s contract came to term at the end of the first campaign in 1952 and he was replaced by Vilela in the second campaign, with the assistance of Pedro Emílio Guerreiro da Franca (1923–1971) (Fig. 1B) and Rui Horácio dos Santos Monteiro (dates of birth and death unknown). Vilela continued as chief of the MBM until 1958, when he was replaced by Franca. At this point, the MBM had two researchers and four assistants, in addition to Franca (Anonymous 1958), who proceeded as chief of the MBM and director of both the CBP and CBAT until his death in 1971 (Anonymous 1972). Following Franca’s passing, Carlos Joaquim Pissarro (1913–1977) assumed the direction of the CBAT until its dissolution in 1974 (Paes da Franca and Monteiro 1977). The scientific staff working both in the field and at the Lisbon headquarters grew over the years, reaching ten researchers and eight assistants employed by the CBAT in 1973. Besides the aforementioned researchers, others played important roles in the collection and study of the material, namely Maria de Lourdes Paes da Franca (1926–2009), Fernando Correia da Costa (dates of birth and death unknown), David Bragança Gil (dates of birth and death unknown), Francisco Palminha (dates of birth and death unknown) and José Gonçalves Sanches (dates of birth and death unknown), amongst others (Fig. 1C).

Specimens were preliminarily examined in the field, either aboard the NO “Baldaque da Silva” (Fig. 2A) or at laboratories on land (Fig. 2B) and later sent to the headquarters in Lisbon. Once in Portugal, this material was studied in detail by the MBM researchers and the results opportunely published. Some local and foreign specialists were involved in the systematic study of part of the specimens collected: in Lisbon, Jaime dos Santos Pinto (dates of birth and death unknown), Estela de Sousa e Silva (1921–2000), Emerita Marques (dates of birth and death unknown), João Tendeiro (dates of birth and death unknown) and Vasco Valdez (dates of birth and death unknown) from the Centro de Zoologia (CZL); in Porto, João Amorim Machado Cruz (dates of birth and death unknown) from the Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade do Porto (FCUP). Amongst foreign researchers, specimens were studied by William Adam (1909–1988) and Eugène Leloup (1902–1981) at the Institut Royal de Sciences Naturelles, Belgique (IRSNB); Jacques Forest (1920–2012), Danièle Guinot (1933–) and Gustave Cherbonnier (1909–1995) at the Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris (MNHN); and Jean Cadenat (1908–1992) and Jacques Blache (1922–1994) of the Institut Français d’Afrique Noire (IFAN), amongst others.

At the end of each of the two MEPA campaigns, a general report of the works developed aboard the NO “Baldaque da Silva” was presented to the Junta das Missões Geográficas e de Investigações do Ultramar by the captain, lieutenant António Júlio Malheiro do Vale (1911–1997) (Malheiro do Vale 1952, 1953a). Preliminary reports summarising the works developed by the MEPA were published by Vilela (1953a) and Malheiro do Vale (1953b). Detailed scientific results of the expeditions were initially published in the journal “Anais da Junta de Investigações do Ultramar”, starting with a general account of the first campaigns in Angola by Vilela (1953b), while Nümann (1953) reported on the marine physics and chemistry. From 1956 to 1959, works previously published in the collections “Anais” and “Memórias da Junta de Investigações do Ultramar” were re-issued in the publication series “Trabalhos da Missão de Biologia Marítima”. After the creation of the CBP, 46 works were published in the series “Notas mimeografadas do Centro de Biologia Piscatória” between 1959 and 1966. These were regarded as preliminary results and the works deemed definitive were finally completed and published in the series “Trabalhos do Centro de Biologia Piscatória”. After the dissolution of the CBP, eight publications appeared under the series “Notas mimeografadas do Centro de Biologia Aquática Tropical” and were continued as “Notas do Centro de Biologia Aquática Tropical”.

The scope of the publications varied, from systematic catalogues (e.g. Paes da Franca and Vasconcelos (1962a); Sanches (1963); Ribeiro (1964a)), ecological and biogeographical notes (e.g. Franca (1968); Franca et al. (1970); Paes da Franca et al. (1970)), experimental fishing techniques (e.g. Monteiro (1960a, 1960b); Franca and Correia da Costa (1961); Franca and Palminha (1965)) and optimisation of industrial processes (e.g. Monteiro (1960c); Torres (1961); Granger and Torres (1970)). Particular focus was given to species of commercial interest, such as tuna fish (Vilela and Monteiro 1959a, 1959b; Paes da Franca 1959; Correia da Costa 1960, 1961, 1962; Correia da Costa and Bragança Gil 1965, 1970; Machado Cruz 1969), sardines (Monteiro 1954, 1960d, 1962), hakes (Franca 1952, 1954b, 1960, 1962, 1971; Paes da Franca 1960c), lobster (Franca et al. 1959, 1961a, 1962) and shrimp (Ribeiro 1970). Additionally, some works were edited in a series of internal notes entitled “Notas Internas de Informação Técnica”, consisting mostly of instructions and comments on the sampling and research methods to be employed (e.g. Ribeiro (1962, 1964a); Bragança Gil (1963); Correia da Costa (1963); Franca (1963); Palminha (1963a, 1963b); Pissarro (1963a, 1963b)), but also systematic catalogues (Franca and Ferreira 1966) and taxonomic studies (Ribeiro 1963).

Figure 1. 

A Herculano Vilela aboard the NO “Baldaque da Silva” at Tombwa, Namibe Province, Angola in 1952 B Pedro Guerreiro da Franca, place and date unknown C MBM staff and navy officials at São Vicente, Cabo Verde in 1958. Sitting, from left to right: Maria de Lourdes Paes da Franca, commander Serradas Duarte, Pedro Guerreiro da Franca. Standing, from left to right: unknown, Francisco Palminha, lieutenant Henrique Serpa de Vasconcelos, Fernando Correia da Costa. Photograph credits: IPMA (B: N.I.22; A, C: unnumbered).

Figure 2. 

A Maria de Lourdes Paes da Franca and Fernando Correia da Costa taking biometric data from a tuna specimen aboard the NO “Baldaque da Silva” at Tarrafal de Santiago, Cabo Verde in 1958 B Francisco Palminha and Maria de Lourdes Paes da Franca working in the laboratory at Baía Farta, Benguela Province, Angola in 1959. Photograph credits: IPMA (A: N.I.291, B: N.I.1478).

To support the fieldwork planned for the missions, the Portuguese government acquired in 1948 the HMS “Rusckholm” from the Australian Navy, a steamer approximately 50 m long and 8.5 m wide (Vilela 1953b). This ship was appropriately modified and adapted for fisheries and oceanographic research and was added to the Portuguese Armada in 1949 as NO (Oceanographic Vessel) “Baldaque da Silva” (Ministério da Marinha 1949) (Fig. 3A). The NO “Baldaque da Silva” supported the MEPA and MBM campaigns until 1960, when it desperately needed repair. To replace it, the government designated the NH (Hydrographic Vessel) “Salvador Correia”, a ship of similar characteristics also bought by the government in 1948 (formerly HMS “Saltarelo”) and assigned to patrol the Angolan coast (Ministério da Marinha 1948). However, its adaptation for oceanographic studies would be too costly and, as an alternative, the government opted for replacing the boiler of the NO “Baldaque da Silva” with that of the NH “Salvador Correia”, leading to an exchange of names between the two vessels. Thus, even though there were campaigns aboard both the NO “Baldaque da Silva” and NH “Salvador Correia”, it was in fact the same vessel that was renamed in 1961. A Portuguese trawler named “Sardinella” was acquired by the CBP in 1960 and equipped with a mechanical hauler for fishing with encircling nets (Bragança Gil and Franca 1963) (Fig. 3B), which operated mostly in Benguela Province, Angola.

To conduct its oceanographic functions, the NO “Baldaque da Silva” was equipped for the collection of plankton (Hensen and Apstein nets; Plankton samplers), substrate (Van Veen, Knudsen and Petersen dredges, Fig. 4A) and water samples (Nansen bottles). Detailed descriptions of the vessel and all its equipment were provided by Malheiro do Vale (1952) and Vilela (1953a, 1953b). The main fishing methods employed during campaigns aboard the ship were bottom trawls with Vigneron-Dhal nets, 170 feet (ca. 52 m) long with 60 mm mesh (Fig. 4B). These were usually conducted at a speed of 8 knots (Malheiro do Vale 1953a) and had variable duration depending on the campaign, from 40 to 120 minutes (Franca et al. 1964). Other frequently used sampling methods were French type lobster traps (Fig. 4C); trawls with Heligoland nets (30, 25, 20, 15 and 10 mm mesh size), usually conducted at shallow depths (15 m or less); “Chinchorro” (i.e. beach trawl) (Fig. 4D); fixed fishing gear (Valencian); or by hand during low tide. Experimental trials were documented for some fishing techniques, namely gill nets (Paes da Franca 1964); lift net (Monteiro 1960a, 1960b); light luring (Franca and Palminha 1965); tuna fishing with encircling nets (Correia da Costa and Bragança Gil 1965, 1970) and with rods and live bait (Correia da Costa 1960, 1961).

During a brief campaign aboard the German RV “Walther Herwig” in Cabo Verde, both bottom and mid-water trawls were employed (von Seydlitz 1971). Other, less frequently used, methods include Stramin nets (conical nets with an iron ring at the mouth, 2 m diameter), especially designed for collecting eggs; longline; shrimp net; traditional techniques such as the “Tarrafa”, “Xávega” and “Mujerona”; and different types of fishing lines, hooks and harpoons. Additionally, some specimens were offered by amateur and professional fishermen or bought at local markets.

Figure 3. 

A NO “Baldaque da Silva” at Mindelo, Cabo Verde in 1958 B Trawler “Sardinella”, place and date unknown. Photograph credits: IPMA (A: N.I.528; B: unnumbered).

Figure 4. 

Some of the sampling methods used during MEPA and MBM campaigns: A Petersen dredge B bottom trawl with Vigneron-Dhal net C French type lobster trap D “Chinchorro” net for beach trawls. Photograph credits: IPMA.

CBAT Centro de Biologia Aquática Tropical

CBP Centro de Biologia Piscatória

GBIF Global Biodiversity Information Facility

IFAN Institut Français d’Afrique Noire

IICA Instituto de Investigação Científica de Angola

INIP Instituto Nacional de Investigação das Pescas

IPMA Instituto Português do Mar e da Atmosfera

IRSNB Institut Royal de Sciences Naturelles de Belgique

ISCED Instituto Superior de Ciências de Educação da Huíla

MB Museu Bocage (currently integrated in the MNHNC)

MBM Missão de Biologia Marítima

MEPA Missão de Estudos de Pesca de Angola

MNHN Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris

MNHNC Museu Nacional de História Natural e da Ciência, Universidade de Lisboa

Catalogues, publications and other documentation associated with the collection were retrieved and digitised. This included published works, unpublished reports, collection datasheets (Fig. 5A) and other manuscript documents deposited in the archives of the Centro de Documentação e Informação, Instituto de Investigação Científica Tropical, Lisboa and the Instituto Português do Mar e Atmosfera, Lisboa. The available campaign reports (only for the MEPA campaigns; Malheiro do Vale (1952, 1953a)) provided detailed descriptions of the vessel and its equipment, locality data for the sampling field stations, details about the sampling methods used and field notes and comments on the trawls’ performance.

With few exceptions, consisting mostly of sporadic collection events or donations, all samples were originally assigned a record number. This record consisted of an indication of the campaign or collection context (e.g. MEPA for Missão de Estudos de Pesca de Angola; MBM for Missão de Biologia Marítima), the number or year of the campaign (e.g. I for the first campaign; 1960 for the 1960 campaign), an indication of the collecting vessel or brigade (e.g. NO for NO “Baldaque da Silva”; B for Benguela Land Brigade), a code denoting the taxonomic group (e.g. P for fish; Cr for crustaceans; M for molluscs) and, finally, a serial number identifying the specimen (e.g. MBM.1960.NO.P.89). These record numbers are physically associated with the specimens and were the reference numbers used in all the original publications. When the collection was transferred to INIP, fish specimens were assigned an additional INIP catalogue number, which was physically attached to the specimens in a Dymo tag. In most cases, both the original record number and the INIP catalogue number were the only information physically linked to the specimens, either in paper, wooden or Dymo tags (Fig. 5B). All the remaining data were recorded in the aforementioned collection datasheets (Fig. 5A), namely the collecting locality and date, taxonomic identifications, additional field notes, morphological observations and measurements. The data contained in these datasheets were transcribed from original field worksheets, which, unfortunately, could not be found in any of the visited archives. Some examples of worksheets used in the field are depicted in Correia da Costa (1963). Less frequently, collecting data were available on paper labels inside (Fig. 5C) or outside (Fig. 5D) the container. Dry preserved shells had CBP original paper labels (Fig. 5E) with the identification and collecting data, but the recorded information was found to be oversimplified and inaccurate when confronted with the associated datasheets.

Upon the integration of the collections in the MB in 1984, each record was assigned a new catalogue number. Excluding fish, all other taxonomic groups have an additional handwritten paper label with the collecting data, transcribed from the collection datasheets by museum staff at the time of the collection’s transfer to the museum. However, these labels frequently contain transcription errors, such as misinterpretation or simplification of the original data. Specimens that were sent on loan to the IRSNB and MNHN for study by foreign researchers are accompanied by an additional label with the taxonomic identification and basic collecting data (Fig. 5F), presumably transcribed by these researchers from original collection datasheets. For the echinoderms examined by Cherbonnier at the MNHN, such labels are the only available source of data, as no datasheets or published references could be found for this material (pers. obs.). When different labels and sources of data were available for a specimen, inconsistencies were frequently identified. To address these problems, we opted to prioritise the collection datasheets as the most original and reliable source of data. Nonetheless, errors were also found on the datasheets, prompting a critical evaluation of each case, with the decision rationale duly recorded. Finally, the Angolan collections include material collected by Carlos Bettencourt Faria (1924–1976), founder of the Mulemba Astronomical Observatory, in the Luanda Region and sent to Lisbon to be studied at the CBP, as part of a collaboration between the CBP and the Instituto de Investigação Científica de Angola (IICA) (Bettencourt Faria 1967). No datasheets were available for this material and all the collecting data, field notes and schematic illustrations were found in an incomplete, unpublished document comprising 120 pages and 12 maps (Bettencourt Faria n.d.) in the archives of MNHNC. Another copy of this document was deposited in the collections of the IICA, currently integrated in the Instituto Superior de Ciências de Educação da Huíla (ISCED) in Lubango, Angola.

All the data associated with the specimens were gathered, digitised and formatted following the DarwinCore standards, in order to be shared in the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF).

Figure 5. 

Different types of labels and sources of data: A collection datasheet B paper, wooden and Dymo tags found with fish specimens C label with collecting data found inside container D label with collecting locality on exterior of container E original CBP label for dry preserved shells F label with collecting data and taxonomic identification by Eugene Leloup.

The collection comprises both dry and fluid preserved specimens. Dry preservation is mostly limited to the Mollusca, Cnidaria and Echinodermata collections, which were stored in open cardboard boxes with cotton cushioning (Fig. 6A) or inside sealed plastic bags with no cushion. These were reconditioned into appropriate clear plastic, closed containers, cushioned with Cell-Aire foam (Fig. 6B). Alternatively, depending on the specimen size, acid-free cardboard boxes, plastic vials and ziplock bags were also used. All original labels were preserved and stored with the specimens.

Fluid preserved specimens were originally stored in glass jars of varied sizes, usually with cork or Bakelite lids, although some specimens were in glass-top, wire-bail jars with rubber gaskets (Fig. 7A–D). Specimens of large dimensions were stored in polyester fibreglass tanks. Original glass jars were replaced by new ones (Fig. 7E, F), as in most cases the original jars presented structural deficiencies (e.g. cracks; melted gaskets; broken lids). Fish and cnidarians were originally preserved in 4% formalin, while most other invertebrates were stored in 70% ethanol. During the present work, the preservative fluid was replaced in all jars and fish specimens still preserved in formalin were progressively transferred to 70% ethanol following the recommendations of Simmons (2014). A new standardised, typewritten label was printed on ResistAll or Valeron paper and placed inside each jar, with the taxonomic identification and collecting data. All existing internal labels were maintained inside the containers, despite errors and inconsistencies and new standardised labels with the current accession number and a barcode were added to the exterior of each container. Whenever possible, all specimens, labels and containers were photographed and original jars and external labels preserved.

Figure 6. 

Dry preserved shells before (A) and after (B) intervention.

Figure 7. 

Fluid preserved specimens before (A–D) and after (E, F) intervention.

All locality data were reviewed and georeferenced. Locality data are presented in the form of decimal degrees using the WGS84 map datum and depths are reported in metres below sea level. Records with only a textual description of collecting locality were georeferenced using the web application GeoLocate (https://www.geo-locate.org/) in combination with available maps and other locality information from relevant publications and campaign reports (Malheiro do Vale 1952, 1953a; Vilela 1953b; Bettencourt Faria n.d.; Franca et al. 1961b, 1964; Soares and Vasconcelos 1962; Paes da Franca 1964; Correia da Costa and Bragança Gil 1965, 1970; von Seydlitz 1971; Baptista et al. 1972). Datasheets often presented geographic coordinates of the sampling field stations in the form of Degrees Minutes Seconds, in an unknown map datum. Most often, the reference number for a field station or trawl was available, allowing the cross-reference with available documentation to obtain the respective coordinates.

Even though geographic coordinates were available for most trawls, only the initial position of the trawl was available. Georeferencing of aquatic sites presents a series of issues related to precision and uncertainty (Vollmar et al. 2010) and for this reason, instead of assigning an uncertainty value to the original coordinates, we provide additional sampling data (e.g. trawl duration and average heading) to allow for a better interpretation of the original locality data.

Given the size and diversity of the collection, detailed taxonomic revisions of each specimen were beyond the scope of this project. Most specimens retained their original identifications, which were updated where necessary to align with current classification systems. For fishes, we followed the classification of the Eschmeyer’s Catalogue of Fishes (Fricke et al. 2022) and for invertebrate collections, the World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS Editorial Board 2022). All previous identifications were dully recorded in the database. Type material in the collections was located and properly signalled.

Angola’s biodiversity and fishing industry were the main focus of these campaigns, with prospections conducted along the country’s entire coast spanning more than a decade (Figs 8, 9). Campaigns in Angola gathered 5076 records, most notably fishes (MB06 – 2506 occurrences), molluscs (MB28 – 1468 occurrences) and decapod crustaceans (MB12 – 851 occurrences) (Table 1). There are also specimens collected during prospections in neighbouring northern Namibia and those resulting from occasional collection events during the trips of the NO “Baldaque da Silva” to the Democratic Republic of the Congo for ship maintenance purposes, which together comprise a total of 61 additional records.

Fieldwork started in Angola aboard the NO “Baldaque da Silva” with the first MEPA campaign between May 1951 and February 1952, immediately followed by a second campaign between February 1952 and July 1953, culminating with a total of 111 bottom trawls. Fieldwork was resumed in 1955 with the first MBM campaign, with the continued action of Land Brigades based at Baía Farta, Benguela Province and Moçâmedes, Namibe Province. Four more campaigns in Angola were supported by the NO “Baldaque da Silva” (under the designation NH “Salvador Correia” from 1961 onwards) in 1957, 1960, 1963 and 1964, during which 102, 68, 100 and 139 bottom trawls were made, respectively (Franca et al. 1964; Ribeiro 1970). Overall, more than 500 trawls were made between 1951 and 1964, from Cabinda Province, Angola to Kunene Region, Namibia. Outside the scope of the MEPA and MBM campaigns, the collection includes a series of specimens collected in the Luanda Region by Herculano Vilela in 1956 and by Carlos Bettencourt Faria between 1960 and 1961. Sporadic collections made by the Instituto das Indústrias de Pesca de Angola and sent to the CBAT extend the temporal range of the Angolan collections to 1971.

This material was studied and published by several Portuguese and foreign researchers. Systematic catalogues were produced for several groups of Angolan fishes (Franca 1954a, 1955, 1957, 1958; Monteiro 1957; Franca and Picciochi 1958; Franca and Ferreira 1966, 1967; Sanches 1966; Pissarro and Sanches 1973), molluscs (Paes da Franca 1955a, 1955b, 1960a; Adam 1962; Leloup 1968) and crustaceans (Guinot and Ribeiro 1962). Additionally, several works were published on the distribution, biology and biogeography of selected species of economic or research interest (Franca and Paes da Franca 1958, 1968a, 1968b, 1969; Franca 1959, 1960, 1962, 1969a, 1969b; Paes da Franca 1967; Ribeiro 1970; Correia da Costa et al. 1971; Correia da Costa and Paes da Franca 1972, 1973; Paes da Franca and Correia da Costa 1972a, 1972b, 1973a). Selected fish specimens were also examined by foreign researchers and cited in works on the Belonidae (Collette and Parin 1970), the Carangidae (Cadenat 1962) and the Anguilliformes (Blache and Saldanha 1972) of the Eastern Atlantic and, more recently, for a revision of the butterfly rays of the Gymnura micrura (Bloch & Schneider, 1801) species complex (Yokota and Carvalho 2017). Most of the echinoderms in the collection were studied by Gustave Cherbonnier at the MNHN, but an account of this material was never published (pers. obs.).

The Angolan collections hold 13 type specimens for seven nominal taxa (Table 2): the fishes Cubiceps niger Nümann in Franca, 1957 and Tylosurus acus rafale Collete & Parin, 1970; the cone snails Conus angolensis Paes da Franca, 1955 and Conus lucirensis Paes da Franca, 1955; the ark clam Arca geissei angolensis Paes da Franca, 1955; and the squids Moroteuthis robsoni Adam, 1962 and Todarodes sagittatus angolensis Adam, 1962. Additionally, Franca (1960) described a subspecies of hake Merluccius capensis paradoxus Franca, 1960 [currently considered a valid species, Merluccius paradoxus Franca, 1960] from Namibia and South Africa. Although the description of this species was certainly based on material collected during the MEPA and MBM campaigns, the author did not designate any type specimens, nor did he cite specific specimen numbers in his description.

The Cabo Verde collections hold a total of 1441 records, most notably molluscs (MB28 – 685 occurrences), fishes (MB06 – 381 occurrences) and decapod crustaceans (MB12 – 253 occurrences) (Table 1). Specimens were collected at all the main islands of the archipelago, between 1957 and 1970 (Figs 8, 10).

Figure 9. 

Distribution of collecting localities in Angola and adjacent northern Namibia represented in the collection, with main collecting areas labelled.

Figure 10. 

Distribution of collecting localities in the Cabo Verde archipelago represented in the collection.

The first MBM campaign in Cabo Verde took place between October and November 1957, with the objective of making a first prospection and guiding future works on the archipelago. Two additional campaigns followed, from July to November 1958 and from April to June 1959, focusing particularly on the fishing of tuna and lobsters. A total of 44, 93 and 125 stations were sampled in 1957, 1958 and 1959, respectively. All islands of the archipelago were surveyed between 1957 and 1959, either aboard the NO “Baldaque da Silva” or in prospections on the coast, especially during low tide.

As part of a Portuguese-German cooperation, two brief campaigns were made aboard the German RV “Walther Herwig”, in 1964 and 1970 (Correia da Costa 1964; von Seydlitz 1971), although only the latter resulted in vouchers deposited in the CBAT collections. The CBAT researchers Maria de Lourdes Paes da Franca, Fernando Correia da Costa and David Bragança Gil participated in this campaign in December 1970, sampling a total of 20 field stations with both bottom and mid-water trawls (von Seydlitz 1971).

A catalogue of the fishes collected during the MBM campaigns in the archipelago was published by Paes da Franca and Vasconcelos (1962a), while Paes da Franca and Correia da Costa (1973b) provided an account of the lanternfish (family Myctophidae) collected aboard the RV “Walther Herwig”. Systematic catalogues were also produced for crustaceans (Guinot and Ribeiro 1962; Ribeiro 1964b, 1964c, 1968, 1973), cephalopods (Adam 1962) and chitons (Leloup 1968). Furthermore, selected fish specimens were examined by foreign researchers and cited in works on the Anguiliformes of the eastern Atlantic (Blache 1967) and the description of a new species of damselfish (Edwards 1986). Additional notes were published on selected species of research interest (Paes da Franca and Vasconcelos 1962b; Vasconcelos and Paes da Franca 1962) and on the biology and fishing of tuna (Correia da Costa 1962) and lobsters (Franca et al. 1959, 1961a, 1962) on the islands. Even though the Gastropoda and Bivalvia were studied and identified by Maria de Lourdes Paes da Franca and the Echinodermata by Gustave Cherbonnier, accounts of these groups were never published.

The Cabo Verde material includes six type specimens for two nominal taxa: the damselfish Chromis lubbocki Edwards, 1986 and the snapping shrimp Alpheus holthuisi Ribeiro, 1964 (Table 2).

A single MBM campaign took place in Mozambique, resulting in a limited collection when compared to those of Angola or Cabo Verde (Fig. 8). In an attempt to permanently occupy the Estação de Biologia Marítima at Inhaca Island, Maputo Province, the MBM conducted a short campaign in the island between July and November 1957, based at the Estação de Biologia Marítima and led by José Gonçalves Sanches. Despite the limited resources and lack of support from the NO “Baldaque da Silva”, Sanches collected material all over Inhaca Island (Fig. 11). Further work was planned in cooperation with the Instituto de Investigação Científica de Moçambique, but limited resources prevented additional MBM campaigns in the country. The collection comprises 656 records, mostly of molluscs (MB28 – 271 occurrences), fishes (MB06 – 177 occurrences) and decapod crustaceans (MB12 – 125 occurrences) (Table 1). In addition to the material collected by Sanches during this campaign, the collection includes a low number of samples occasionally collected by different contributors, such as José Pinto Lopes (1915–1981) (director of the Instituto de Investigação Científica de Moçambique) from Praia Sepúlveda, Gaza Province and M.S. Soares (dates of birth and death unknown) from Praia do Wimbe and Farol da Maringanha, Cabo Delgado Province. Excluding a single record from 1951, all this material was collected between 1957 and 1958.

Systematic catalogues of the material collected on the Inhaca Island were only published for the Bivalvia and Gastropoda (Paes da Franca 1960b), Cepha­lopoda (Adam 1962) and Teleostei (Sanches 1963). The Echinodermata were identified by Cherbonnier, but an account of this material was never published. This collection holds no type material.

Figure 11. 

Distribution of collecting localities in Mozambique represented in the collection (A), with detail of Maputo Bay and Inhaca Island (B).

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

No ethical statement was reported.

Diogo Parrinha and Leonor Brites Soares were supported by PORBIOTA. Diogo Parrinha is currently supported by Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (2021.05238.BD).

All authors have contributed equally.

Diogo Parrinha https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1302-025X

Alexandra Cartaxana https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8624-2198

Maria Judite Alves https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0550-4190

All of the data that support the findings of this study are available in the main text.