NGC_6791      The red limit of the straggler area is BP-RP=1.20.
Berkeley_39   The distance d=3035.4 (dmode+01) of Cantat-Gaudin et al.
Berkeley_39     (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93) was use to fit the
Berkeley_39     isochrone. There are several stragglers candidates with a radius
Berkeley_39     larger than the apparent radius of the cluster (r=10 arcmin
Berkeley_39     (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D, Cat. B/ocl).
King_2        The isochrone was move in 0.05 to the red and a distance
King_2         modulus of m-M=13.8 was used to fit it.
Berkeley_32   The red limit of the straggler area is BP-RP=0.86
Berkeley_70   The red limit of the straggler area is BP-RP=1.28.
Berkeley_70    An isochrone of log(t)=9.3 provide a better fit.
Berkeley_18   The red limit of the straggler area is BP-RP=1.31.
Berkeley_18    There are several stragglers candidates with a radius larger than
Berkeley_18    the apparent radius of the cluster (r=12 arcmin (Dias et al.,
Berkeley_18    2002A&A...389..871D, Cat. B/ocl).  Apparently,
Berkeley_18    stars DR2 208498367050003072, DR2 208543824983422848,
Berkeley_18    DR2 208563959789949568 are massive stragglers. This object
Berkeley_18    probably suffers from differential reddening. We suggest
Berkeley_18    exploring this effect in future works.
Trumpler_5    The red limit of the straggler area is BP-RP=1.30.
Trumpler_5     There are several stragglers candidates with a radius larger than
Trumpler_5     the cluster's apparent radius (r=15.4 arcmin (Dias et al.,
Trumpler_5     2002A&A...389..871D, Cat. B/ocl).  Apparently, stars
Trumpler_5     Gaia DR2 3326777286895609344, Gaia DR2 3326807557824686336,
Trumpler_5     Gaia DR2 3326824565895691392 are massive stragglers. This object
Trumpler_5     probably suffers from differential reddening. We suggest
Trumpler_5     exploring this effect in future works.
Berkeley_22   The red limit of the straggler area is BP-RP=1.55.
NGC_7789      The red limit of the straggler area is BP-RP=0.70.
NGC_7789       There are several stragglers candidates with a radius larger than
NGC_7789       the apparent radius of the cluster (r=25.0  arcmin (Dias et al.,
NGC_7789       2002A&A...389..871D, Cat. B/ocl).  Apparently, star
NGC_7789       Gaia DR2 1994778907595519616 is a massive straggler.
Berkeley_21   The red limit of the straggler area is BP-RP=1.44. Apparently,
Berkeley_21    star Gaia DR2 3424171202249574656 is a massive straggler.
NGC_2420      Best fit with log(t)=9.3, Av=1.5 and solar metallicity.
NGC_2141      The red limit of the yellow straggler area is BP-RP=1.45.
NGC_2141       There are several stragglers candidates with a radius larger than
NGC_2141       the apparent radius of the cluster (r=10 arcmin (Dias et al.,
NGC_2141       2002A&A...389..871D, Cat. B/ocl). This object probably suffers
NGC_2141       from differential reddening. We suggest exploring this effect in
NGC_2141       future works.
Gulliver_55   This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Gulliver_55    Cat. B/ocl), parameters  log(t)=9.20, E(b-v)=0.28 and Z=0.05 are
Gulliver_55    from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M). Apparently star
Gulliver_55    Gaia DR2 1821639395722981888 is a massive straggler.
NGC_752       This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_752        Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=9.17, Av=0.157,
NGC_752        [Fe/H]=-0.030 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_752        (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). According to
NGC_752        Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A, Cat. J/A+A/463/789),
NGC_752        this cluster host a confirmed blue straggler star
NGC_752        (Gaia DR2 342856656440790784= BD+36 367) however, according to
NGC_752        Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93),
NGC_752        it is not a proper-motion member.
Gulliver_4    This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Gulliver_4     Cat. B/ocl), parameters  log(t)=9.16, E(b-v)=0.509 and Z=0.021
Gulliver_4     are from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
Gulliver_1    This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Gulliver_1     Cat. B/ocl), parameters  log(t)=9.13, E(B-V)=0.220 and Z=0.016
Gulliver_1     are from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
IC_166        [Fe/H]=-0.08 selected from Schiappacasse-Ulloa et al.
IC_166         (2018AJ....156...94S, J/AJ/156/94). This object probably suffers
IC_166         from differential reddening, we suggest exploring this effect
IC_166         in future works.
Pismis_18     The distance d=2168.1 (dmode+01) of Cantat-Gaudin et al.
Pismis_18      (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93) was used to fit the
Pismis_18      isochrone.
NGC_3680      The parameter log(t) was selected from Smiljanic et al.
NGC_3680       (2009A&A...502..267S, Cat. J/A+A/502/267)
King_11       The red limit of the straggler area is BP-RP=1.8. This object
King_11        probably suffers from differential reddening. We suggest
King_11        exploring this effect in future works. An important number of
King_11        binaries around the turnoff is present. Apparently,  star
King_11        Gaia DR2 2214223011673276288  is a massive straggler.
NGC_2660      Best fit with log(t)=9.20, Av=1 and [Fe/H]=+0.04.
NGC_2243      Best fit with log(t)=9.5
NGC_2158      The red limit of the straggler area is BP-RP=1.00.
NGC_2158       Best fit with log(t)=9.25, Av=1.3 and solar metallicity.
NGC_2158       This object probably suffers from differential reddening.
NGC_2158       We suggest exploring this effect in future works.
Berkeley_29   Best fit with log(t)=9.4, E(b-v)=0.2 and solar metallicity.
Berkeley_23   Best fit with log(t)=9.1, Av=1.2 and solar metallicity.
Gulliver_51   This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Gulliver_51    Cat. B/ocl), parameters  log(t)=8.09, E(b-v)=0.37 and Z=0.025 are
Gulliver_51    from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
NGC_2632      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2632       Cat. B/ocl) however,  parameters log(t)=8.87, Av=0.084,
NGC_2632       [Fe/H]=+0.070 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_2632       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Ahumada & Lapasset
NGC_2632       (2007A&A...463..789A, Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite star
NGC_2632       DR2 661322060465742336 =HD 73666=40 Cancri as a blue straggler,
NGC_2632       the same star is include in our catalogue.
NGC_6940      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_6940       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=9.010, Av =0.455,
NGC_6940       [Fe/H]=+ 0.150 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_6940       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Apparently, star
NGC_6940       Gaia DR2 1857459766532229248 is a massive straggler.
Gulliver_36   This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Gulliver_36    Cat. B/ocl), parameters log(t)=8.813, E(b-v)=0.181 and Z=0.040
Gulliver_36    are from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
Gulliver_39   This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Gulliver_39    Cat. B/ocl), parameters log(t)=8.918, E(b-v)=0.716 and Z=0.016
Gulliver_39    are from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
NGC_6633      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_6633       Cat. B/ocl) however,  parameters log(t)=8.888, Av=0.451,
NGC_6633       [Fe/H]=-0.080 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_6633       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_1817      The parameters used to fit the isochrone: log(t)=9.04,
NGC_1817       E(b-v)=0.23 and [Fe/H]=-0.40 selected from Donati et al.
NGC_1817       (2014MNRAS.437.1241D, Cat. J/MNRAS/437/1241).
NGC_2447      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2447       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.747, Av=0.105,
NGC_2447       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_2447       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
Melotte_71    This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Melotte_71     Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=9.112, Av=0.483,
Melotte_71     [Fe/H]=-0.270 were taken from Bossini et al.
Melotte_71     (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_2516      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2516       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.40, Av=0.220,
NGC_2516       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_2516       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A,
NGC_2516       Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite star DR2 5290767631226220032=HD 66194 --
NGC_2516       Be Star as a blue straggler, the same star is include in our
NGC_2516       catalogue.
Waterloo_7    This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Waterloo_7     Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.76, Av=0.418, Z=0.025
Waterloo_7    were taken from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
Ruprecht_115  This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Ruprecht_115   Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.47, Av=2.317,
Ruprecht_115   [Fe/H]=-0.102 were taken from Bossini et al.
Ruprecht_115   (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
Gulliver_23   This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Gulliver_23    Cat. B/ocl), parameters log(t)=8.768, E(b-v)=0.828 and Z=0.030
Gulliver_23    are from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
NGC_2482      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2482       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.550, Av=0.359,
NGC_2482       [Fe/H]=-0.070 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_2482       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_2527      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2527       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.919, Av=0.195,
NGC_2527       [Fe/H]=-0.100 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_2527       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Ahumada & Lapasset
NGC_2527       (2007A&A...463..789A, Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite star
NGC_2527       Gaia DR2 5597873113032943744= HD 67097 as a blue straggler
NGC_2527       however, according with their proper motions values this star is
NGC_2527       not a member.
IC_1369       This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
IC_1369        Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.462, Av=2.050,
IC_1369        [Fe/H]=0.090 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
IC_1369        Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
Coin_2        This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Coin_2         Cat. B/ocl), parameters log(t)=8.635, E(b-v)=0.286 and Z=0.017
Coin_2         are from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
NGC_1662      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_1662       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.957, Av=0.615,
NGC_1662       [Fe/H]=-0.110 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_1662       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_7209      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_7209       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.533, Av=0.546,
NGC_7209       [Fe/H]=0.070 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_7209       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_1528      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_1528       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.596, Av=0.794,
NGC_1528       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_1528       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). The distance d=928.8 (dmode+01) of
NGC_1528       Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93) was
NGC_1528       use to fit the isochrone. Ahumada & Lapasset
NGC_1528       (2007A&A...463..789A, Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite stars
NGC_1528       DR2 271672353816125696=HD 26603
NGC_1528       and DR2 271765125108457856=HD 26775 as blue stragglers
NGC_1528       candidates, however both are not a proper-motion members.
IC_2714       This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
IC_2714        Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.550, Av=0.991,
IC_2714        [Fe/H]=0.020 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
IC_2714        Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A,
IC_2714        Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite stars
IC_2714        DR2 5336823493269686016=TYC 8963-1435-1 and
IC_2714        DR2 5336825829732014720=HD 308349 as blue straggler candidates.
IC_2714        According to Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C,
IC_2714        Cat. J/A+A18/A93) star TYC 8963-1435-1 is a member; however, it
IC_2714        is located in the blue-hook, and we decide not considered it as a
IC_2714        straggler. On the other hand, star HD 308349 it is not a proper
IC_2714        motion member.
Gulliver_21   This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Gulliver_21    Cat. B/ocl), parameters log(t)=8.536, E(b-v)=0.054 and Z=0.038
Gulliver_21    are from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
Gulliver_27   This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Gulliver_27    Cat. B/ocl), parameters log(t)=8.504, E(b-v)=0.603 and Z=0.005
Gulliver_27    are from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
NGC_2287      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2287       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.486, Av=0.059,
NGC_2287       [Fe/H]=-0.110 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_2287       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Ahumada & Lapasset
NGC_2287       (2007A&A...463..789A, Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite stars
NGC_2287       DR2 2926942116843379968=* 12 CMa
NGC_2287       and DR2 2927012515646285440=HD 49024 as possible blue stragglers
NGC_2287       type 2. * 12 CMa it is not a member according to Cantat-Gaudin et
NGC_2287       al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93). HD 49024 is a member
NGC_2287       located around the turnoff of the cluster; therefore, it quite
NGC_2287       easy to misclassify these star as a straggler, in our catalogue,
NGC_2287       this object is not included.
NGC_2374      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2374       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.586, Av=0.425,
NGC_2374       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_2374       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_2567      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2567       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.542, Av=0.468,
NGC_2567       [Fe/H]=-0.040 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_2567       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_1545      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_1545       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.019, Av=0.917,
NGC_1545       [Fe/H]=-0.060 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_1545       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). The distance d=668.6
NGC_1545       (dmode+01) of Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C,
NGC_1545       Cat. J/A+A18/A93) was use to fit the isochrone.
NGC_7092      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_7092       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.491, Av=0.0.049,
NGC_7092       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_7092       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_6152      Parameter log(t)=8.65 and E(b-v)=0.20 were taken from WEBDA.
Collinder_463 This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Collinder_463  Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.427, Av =0.836,
Collinder_463  [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
Collinder_463  Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). The distance d=789.8 (dmode+01) of
Collinder_463  Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93) was
Collinder_463  use to fit the isochrone.
Gulliver_52   This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Gulliver_52    Cat. B/ocl), parameters log(t)=8.331, E(b-v)=0.506 and Z=0.019
Gulliver_52    are from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
NGC_4349      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_4349       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.451, Av=1.161,
NGC_4349       [Fe/H]=-0.070 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_4349       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
Coin_35       This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Coin_35        Cat. B/ocl), parameters log(t)=8.273, E(b-v)=0.725 and Z=0.032
Coin_35        are from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
Gulliver_40   This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Gulliver_40    Cat. B/ocl), parameters log(t)=8.244, E(b-v)=0.255 and Z=0.010
Gulliver_40    are from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
NGC_1039      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_1039       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.101, Av=0.239,
NGC_1039       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_1039       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). The distance d=481.2 (dmode+01) of
NGC_1039       Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93) was
NGC_1039       use to fit the isochrone.
Coin_15       This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Coin_15        Cat. B/ocl), parameters log(t)=8.219, E(b-v)=0.477 and Z=0.028
Coin_15        are from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
NGC_2910      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2910       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.678, Av=0.858,
NGC_2910       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_2910       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_5316      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_5316       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.184, Av=0.772,
NGC_5316       [Fe/H]=0.130 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_5316       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_5460      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_5460       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.110, Av=0.328,
NGC_5460       [Fe/H]=0.030 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_5460       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_7788      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_7788       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.269, Av=1.627,
NGC_7788       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_7788       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_6709      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_6709       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.239, Av=0.814,
NGC_6709       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_6709       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A,
NGC_6709       Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite stars
NGC_6709       DR2 4311560408276862080=NGC 6709 11 and
NGC_6709       DR2 4311607652919937920=Cl* NGC 6709 SS B3 as possible
NGC_6709       stragglers. Both are members according to Cantat-Gaudin et al.
NGC_6709       (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93) however, both appear in
NGC_6709       the main sequence and not in the region of the stragglers
NGC_6709       in the CMD.
NGC_1647      The distance d=554.2 (dmode+01) of Cantat-Gaudin et al.
NGC_1647       (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93) was use to fit the
NGC_1647       isochrone.
NGC_6192      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_6192       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.251, Av=1.731,
NGC_6192       [Fe/H]=0.120 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_6192       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
IC_2488       This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
IC_2488        Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.200, Av=0.702,
IC_2488        [Fe/H]=0.080 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
IC_2488        Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A,
IC_2488        Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite star DR2 5306633687113120000=HD 302225
IC_2488        as a blue straggler, the star is a member according to
IC_2488        Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93);
IC_2488        however, it is located in the turnoff of the cluster and
IC_2488        therefore was not included in our catalogue.
NGC_225       This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_225        Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.254, Av=0.821,
NGC_225        [Fe/H]=0.080 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_225        Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
Roslund_3     This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Roslund_3      Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.643, Av=1.035,
Roslund_3      [Fe/H]=0.080 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
Roslund_3      Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A,
Roslund_3      Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite stars DR2 1823376864591083904=HD 350990
Roslund_3      and HD 350991 as blue stragglers, HD 350990 is a member according
Roslund_3      to Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93)
Roslund_3      however is located in the main sequence of the cluster and not
Roslund_3      in the straggler region, on the other hand, HD 350991 was not
Roslund_3      observed by Gaia.
NGC_2323      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2323       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.975, Av=0.474,
NGC_2323       [Fe/H]=0.080 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_2323       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A,
NGC_2323       Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite stars DR2 3051565643815916672=BD-08 1696
NGC_2323       and DR2 3050056976422889472=BD-08 1689. BD-08 1689 is a member
NGC_2323       according to Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C,
NGC_2323       Cat. J/A+A18/A93), but appears just down the turnoff of the
NGC_2323       cluster, BD-08 1689 instead is not a proper motion member.
NGC_5138      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_5138       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.638, Av=0.755,
NGC_5138       [Fe/H]=0.120 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_5138       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_6087      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_6087       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.046, Av=0.453,
NGC_6087       [Fe/H]=0.210 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_6087       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_7063      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_7063       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.274, Av=0.326,
NGC_7063       [Fe/H]=0.000 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_7063       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_2972      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2972       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.642, Av=1.198,
NGC_2972       [Fe/H]=-0.090 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_2972       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). The distance
NGC_2972       d=1633.3 (dmode+01) of Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C,
NGC_2972       Cat. J/A+A18/A93) was use to fit the isochrone.
NGC_6716      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_6716       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.932, Av=0.707,
NGC_6716       [Fe/H]=-0.310 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_6716       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
IC_4725       This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
IC_4725        Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.984, Av=7.984,
IC_4725        [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
IC_4725        Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A,
IC_4725        Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite stars
IC_4725        DR2 4092873695966184320=HD 170475,
IC_4725        DR2 4092906509511384064=HD 170682,
IC_4725        DR2 4092908360541000320= HD 170719,
IC_4725        DR2 4092856790967940608=HD 170835,
IC_4725        DR2 4092855416578333952= HD 170836  as possible blue stragglers.
IC_4725        HD 170682 and HD 170719 are not members according to
IC_4725        Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93).
IC_4725        HD 170475, HD 170835, HD 170836 are members but located in the
IC_4725        turnoff.
Lynga_2       This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Lynga_2        Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.933, Av=0.691,
Lynga_2        [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
Lynga_2        Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). The distance d=859.5 (dmode+01) of
Lynga_2        Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93) was
Lynga_2        use to fit the isochrone.
Trumpler_2    This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Trumpler_2     Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.962, Av=0.954,
Trumpler_2     [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
Trumpler_2     Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). The distance d=640.9 (dmode+01) of
Trumpler_2     Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93)
Trumpler_2     was use to fit the isochrone.
NGC_3228      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_3228       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.424, Av=0.131,
NGC_3228       [Fe/H]=0.010 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_3228       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
Haffner_21    This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Haffner_21     Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.478, Av=0.686,
Haffner_21     [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
Haffner_21     Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). The distance d=2409.5 (dmode+01) of
Haffner_21     Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93)
Haffner_21     was use to fit the isochrone.
Gulliver_12   This cluster was not include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Gulliver_12    Cat. B/ocl), parameters log(t)=7.909, E(b-v)=0.268 and Z=0.014
Gulliver_12    are from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
NGC_4439      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_4439       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.778, Av=1.064,
NGC_4439       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_4439       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). The distance d=1657.6 (dmode+01) of
NGC_4439       Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93)
NGC_4439       was use to fit the isochrone.
NGC_5617      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_5617       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.140, Av=1.592,
NGC_5617       [Fe/H]=-0.180 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_5617       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_6204      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_6204       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.576, Av=1.291,
NGC_6204       [Fe/H]=0.020 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_6204       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_6704      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_6704       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.237, Av=2.260,
NGC_6704       [Fe/H]=0.00  were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_6704       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). The distance d=1775.0 (dmode+01) of
NGC_6704       Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93)
NGC_6704       was use to fit the isochrone.
NGC_2546      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2546       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.962, Av=0.464,
NGC_2546       [Fe/H]=0.010 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_2546       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A,
NGC_2546       Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite stars DR2 5541216863701067264=HD 69067
NGC_2546       and DR2 5541472465805985024=HD 68450 as possible blue stragglers.
NGC_2546       According to Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C,
NGC_2546       Cat. J/A+A18/A93) both are non-members.
IC_2157       This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
IC_2157        Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.618, Av=1.507,
IC_2157        [Fe/H]=0.00  were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
IC_2157        Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
Collinder_394 This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Collinder_394  Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.969, Av=0.683,
Collinder_394  [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
Collinder_394  Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). The distance d= 659.4 (dmode+01) of
Collinder_394  Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93)
Collinder_394  was use to fit the isochrone.
Blanco_1      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Blanco_1       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.975, Av=0.031,
Blanco_1       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
Blanco_1       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A,
Blanco_1       Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite star
Blanco_1       Zeta Sculptoris=HD 224990=DR2 2320885329010329216 as a possible
Blanco_1       blue straggler however, according to Cantat-Gaudin et al.
Blanco_1       (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93) it is not a member.
NGC_2451A     This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2451A      Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.647, Av=0.000,
NGC_2451A      [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_2451A      Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A,
NGC_2451A      Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite star DR2 5585285049228526080=HD 61831
NGC_2451A      as a possible blue straggler; however, according to
NGC_2451A      Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93), it
NGC_2451A      is not a member. The same study considered this cluster and
NGC_2451A      NGC 2451B as a single one. In this catalogue, instead, we
NGC_2451A      separate both clusters.
NGC_1220      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_1220       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.957, Av=2.162,
NGC_1220       [Fe/H]=0.00  were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_1220       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_5749      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_5749       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.812, Av=1.024,
NGC_5749       [Fe/H]=0.00  were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_5749       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_4609      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_4609       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.523, Av=1.069,
NGC_4609       [Fe/H]=0.050 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_4609       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
Trumpler_21   This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Trumpler_21    Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.690, Av=0.723,
Trumpler_21    [Fe/H]=0.000 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
Trumpler_21    Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). The distance d=1174.4 (dmode+01) of
Trumpler_21    Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93)
Trumpler_21    was use to fit the isochrone.
IC_2391       This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
IC_2391        Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.561, Av=0.093,
IC_2391        [Fe/H]=0.000 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
IC_2391        Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
King_4        This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
King_4         Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.646, Av=2.411,
King_4         [Fe/H]=0.000 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
King_4         Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_2451B     This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2451B      Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.592, Av=0.208,
NGC_2451B      [Fe/H]=0.000 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_2451B      Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A,
NGC_2451B      Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite star DR2 5538726710386348160=HD 63465
NGC_2451B      as a possible blue straggler; however, according to
NGC_2451B      Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93), it
NGC_2451B      is not a member. The same study considered this cluster and
NGC_2451B      NGC 2451A as a single one. In this catalogue, instead, we
NGC_2451B      separate both clusters.
IC_4665       This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
IC_4665        Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.581, Av=0.397,
IC_4665        [Fe/H]=-0.030 were taken from Bossini et al.
IC_4665        (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_6242      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_6242       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.767, Av=0.988,
NGC_6242       [Fe/H]=0.00  were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_6242       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). The distance d=1131.3 (dmode+01) of
NGC_6242       Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93)
NGC_6242       was use to fit the isochrone.
NGC_2547      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2547       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.432, Av=0.124,
NGC_2547       [Fe/H]=0.00  were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_2547       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_6830      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_6830       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=8.005, Av=0.124,
NGC_6830       [Fe/H]=0.00  were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_6830       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
Collinder_140 This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Collinder_140  Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.473, Av=0.105,
Collinder_140  [Fe/H]=0.010 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
Collinder_140  Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
Pismis_4      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Pismis_4       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.905, Av=0.093,
Pismis_4       [Fe/H]=-0.200 were taken from Bossini et al.
Pismis_4       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_4463      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_4463       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.540, Av=1.439,
NGC_4463       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_4463       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
Trumpler_7    This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Trumpler_7     Cat. B/ocl) however,  parameters log(t)=7.692, Av=0.841,
Trumpler_7     [Fe/H]= 0.00 were taken from Bossini et al.
Trumpler_7     (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_1960      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_1960       Cat. B/ocl) however,  parameters log(t)=7.408, Av=0.657,
NGC_1960       [Fe/H]= 0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_1960       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_4103      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_4103       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.436, Av=0.994,
NGC_4103       [Fe/H]= 0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_4103       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). The distance d=1660.8 (dmode+01) of
NGC_4103       Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93)
NGC_4103       was use to fit the isochrone.
NGC_5281      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_5281       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.669, Av=0.816,
NGC_5281       [Fe/H]=-0.020 were taken from Bossini et al.
NGC_5281       (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
Pozzo_1       This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Pozzo_1        Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.143, E(b-v)=0.079,
Pozzo_1        Z=0.037 were taken from Monteiro & Dias (2019MNRAS.487.2385M).
NGC_2302      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2302       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.873, Av=0.636,
NGC_2302       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_2302       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_6531      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_6531       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.873, Av=0.636,
NGC_6531       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_6531       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
Ruprecht_44   This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
Ruprecht_44    Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.132, Av=1.885,
Ruprecht_44    [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
Ruprecht_44    Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_7235      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_7235       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.006, Av=2.516,
NGC_7235       [Fe/H]=0.00 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_7235       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_2343      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2343       Cat. B/ocl) however,  parameters log(t)=7.934, Av=0.494,
NGC_2343       [Fe/H]=0.030 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_2343       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_2645      This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_2645       Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=7.425, Av=1.292,
NGC_2645       [Fe/H]=0.000 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B,
NGC_2645       Cat. J/A+A/623/A108).
NGC_5822      The star DR2 5887526016720381312  with a radius ~70 arcmin is
NGC_5822       probably an outlier and not a real blue straggler.
Collinder_110 There are several stragglers candidates with a radius larger than
Collinder_110  the cluster's apparent radius (r=18.0 arcmin
Collinder_110  (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D, Cat. B/ocl).
NGC_6124      Both stragglers candidates have a radius larger than the cluster's
NGC_6124       apparent radius (r=39.0 arcmin (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D,
NGC_6124       Cat. B/ocl). Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A,
NGC_6124       Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite star DR2 5993137136537019136=HD 325560
NGC_6124       as a possible blue straggler, however, the star does not have an
NGC_6124       astrometric solution in the Gaia system.
Collinder_261 There are several stragglers candidates with a radius larger than
Collinder_261  the apparent radius of the cluster (r=9.0 arcmin (Dias et al.,
Collinder_261  2002A&A...389..871D, Cat. B/ocl). This object probably suffers
Collinder_261  from differential reddening. We suggest exploring this effect
Collinder_261  in future works.
Trumpler_20   Apparently, star Gaia DR2 6056602906231196032 is a massive
Trumpler_20    straggler.
NGC_2354      Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A, Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite
NGC_2354       star Gaia DR2 5617124328988907264= TYC 6528-203-1 as a blue
NGC_2354       straggler, however, is not a member according to Cantat-Gaudin
NGC_2354       et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93). This cluster
NGC_2354       hosts an eclipsing binary of beta Lyrae type (V* QU CMa) that
NGC_2354       was observed but has no colours in DR2 and was not included in
NGC_2354       the new catalogue.
IC_2602       Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A, Cat. J/A+A/463/789) cite
               star Gaia DR2 5239828735008608896=HD 93030=Theta Carinae as a
IC_2602        genuine blue straggler, which, however, does not appear in
IC_2602        Gaia DR2.
NGC_6603      The parameter log(t) was selected from Netopil et al.
NGC_6603       (2015A&A...582A..19N). This object probably suffers from
NGC_6603       differential reddening, we suggest exploring this effect in
NGC_6603       future works.
IC_1311       This object probably suffers from differential reddening.
IC_1311        We suggest exploring this effect in future works.
Melotte_66    This object probably suffers from differential reddening.
Melotte_66     We suggest exploring this effect in future works.
NGC_1245      This object probably suffers from differential reddening.
NGC_1245       We suggest exploring this effect in future works.
NGC_1798      This object probably suffers from differential reddening.
NGC_1798       We suggest exploring this effect in future works.
NGC_2194      This object probably suffers from differential reddening.
NGC_2194       We suggest exploring this effect in future works.
NGC_6819      This object probably suffers from differential reddening.
NGC_6819       We suggest exploring this effect in future works.
NGC_7044      This object probably suffers from differential reddening.
NGC_7044       We suggest exploring this effect in future works.
Pismis_3      This object probably suffers from differential reddening.
Pismis_3       We suggest exploring this effect in future works.