12575818-6459323) show higher values of EW(Li) compared to the other candidates, showing more dispersion with respect to the rest of the cluster members as well. Fulfilling the rest of criteria, these stars seem to be Li-rich (non-giant) members, and are included as candidates of the cluster by a series of previous studies (Magrini et al. 2014; Tautvaišienė et al. 2015; Jacobson et al. 2016; Jackson et al. 2021).

* NGC 6633

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. A.1.** EW(Li)-versus-$T_{\text{eff}}$ diagram showing the final candidate selection (red squares) for NGC 6633, a 575 Myr-old intermediate-age cluster. In green squares we mark a series of late-K and M stars with considerably higher values of EW(Li) than would be expected for this cluster, but still listed as final candidates of the cluster.</figcaption></figure>

NGC 6633 is an open cluster in the constellation Ophiuchus. The age estimations for this cluster span an age range of 575–773 Myr (e.g., Umezu & Saio 2000; Jeffries et al. 2002; Sestito & Randich 2005; Jacobson et al. 2016; Magrini et al. 2017). While Bossini et al. (2019) gave an estimation of $773_{-10}^{+50}$ Myr (older than the age of the Hyades, 750 Myr), we have here adopted the younger estimation of 575 Myr in Jackson et al. (2021).

Of the final 62 Li candidates for NGC 6633, we discarded 14 stars with no astrometric and photometric Gaia data, further listed as non-members by Jackson et al. (2021). Regarding kinematics and astrometry, we note that both the RV and parallax distributions for NGC 6633 revealed a large contaminant population in the middle of the distribution, which could not be discarded with the aid of the $2\sigma$ clipping procedure (as we have done in the case of the remaining 41 clusters in the sample to identify contaminants in the tails of the distribution). The presence of this contaminant population significantly affected the mean RV and mean parallax rendered by the Gaussian fits, and also gave very high final dispersions even after the final convergence of the clipping procedure was reached. When comparing the final fits with the literature values (see Tables 3 and 4), we saw that taking all the contaminant RVs and parallaxes in the middle of the distributions into consideration caused the mean RV and parallax to deviate considerably from the reference estimates for this cluster and effectively affected the final cluster candidate selection well. For this reason, we decided to manually filter out this contaminant population before re-analysing the RV and parallax distributions. In this way, we obtained mean values fully consistent with the literature estimations. This step was vital in order to obtain a probable final list of candidate members for this cluster, seeing as we found that some of the stars in the contaminant population even seemed to fulfil the rest of criteria in spite of

clearly not being part of NGC 6633 according to the kinematic and astrometric distributions (which is why kinematics and astrometry are the first criteria applied and the most restrictive in our analysis).

Regarding previous membership selections from the literature, we found the following number of stars in common with these studies: Firstly, we found seven stars in common with Heiter et al. (2014), as well as eight stars in Jacobson et al. (2016), six stars in Magrini et al. (2017), 24 stars in Sampedro et al. (2017), 22 stars in Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018), and 32 stars in Randich et al. (2018). Finally, Jackson et al. (2021) includes only 19 out of our 67 final candidates, and all the remaining stars in our final selection were not included in their study. We also note that we reinforced the membership of our final selection by making use of the additional members with EW(Li) in Jeffries (1997), Heiter et al. (2014), Magrini et al. (2017), and Sampedro et al. (2017). Finally, regarding non-members, one of the Li-rich giants in our list (J18265248+0627259) is listed in Smiljanic et al. (2018).

For these cluster we have classified 19 stars as possible Li members, marked as ‘Y?’ in the table of Appendix C and indicated as open squares in all EW(Li)-versus-$T_{\text{eff}}$ diagrams to differentiate them from the rest of the candidates (see Subsect. 4 and Appendix B). As showcased in Fig. A.1, these stars are late K and M type stars with $T_{\text{eff}} < 4800–5000$ K, and all of them consistently present values of EW(Li) which are considerably larger than we would expect for KM stars in NGC 6633 (575–630 Myr). As such, we decided not to take any of these 19 stars into account when creating the empirical envelope for this cluster. We here refer to the detailed discussion in the individual note of NGC 3532, another intermediate-age cluster that notably showed the same issue with a larger number of stars, showcasing higher Li values than would be expected for KM member stars as a result of the GES measurement process to obtain EW(Li)s at very low temperatures. Similarly to NGC 3532, we consider all these 19 stars to be robust cluster members, consistently fulfilling the rest of membership criteria, with six of them listed as high probability members by Jackson et al. (2016) with $P=0.87–1.00$ (the rest of them were not included in their study), and several appearing as candidates in other studies as well (Cantat-Gaudin et al. 2018; Randich et al. 2018). Even though we believe that this factor cannot fully explain the higher EWs of all of these 19 stars, we also note that some of them also exhibit high rotation (the iDR6 sample for this cluster does not offer any values of $H\alpha$), and these faster rotators certainly could have consequently depleted Li more slowly, resulting in somewhat higher EW(Li)s.

Regarding the age of NGC 6633, we note that the age estimations for this cluster vary depending on the study, spanning an age range of 575–773 Myr: from 600–630 Myr (Sestito & Randich 2005; Jacobson et al. 2016; Magrini et al. 2017), to the estimation of $773_{-10}^{+50}$ Myr by Bossini et al. (2019) (older than the age of the Hyades, 750 Myr), to 575 Myr in the recently published paper by Jackson et al. (2021) (younger than the age of the Hyades). On the other hand, Umezu & Saio (2000) and Jeffries et al. (2002) considered a very similar age to the Hyades for NGC 6633, and concluded that the lower metallicity of this cluster, $-0.10–-0.01$ dex (Jeffries et al. 2002; Jacobson et al. 2016; Magrini et al. 2018), was a factor that could explain why the EW(Li) envelope for NGC 6633 lied above the Hyades, and thus, the fact that, according to the study, Li was being depleted at a slower pace in the case of NGC 6633. We personally interpreted the dependence of Li depletion with cluster metallicity differently, as we adopted an appreciably younger age of 575 Myr for NGC 6633, as reported by Bossini
et al. (2019) making use of Gaia DR2 data. We believe that this younger age is in agreement with our final selection for this cluster, and explain the fact that its upper Li envelope lies slightly above the Hyades due to NGC 6633 being younger by at least 150 Myr, and not as a result of being more metal-poor. We thus suggest that the metallicity of NGC 6633 has no observable effect on the position of its Li envelope in comparison to the envelope for the Hyades cluster as these clusters do not seem to be coeval.

## Appendix A.3: Old clusters (age > 700 Myr)

### NGC 2477

NGC 2477 is one of the richest open clusters in the Southern sky with an age of 0.7–1.0 Gyr (Gao 2018; Rain et al. 2021).

Among the nine Li candidates for NGC 2477, we note that we accepted as a final candidate one star with no measured RV in iDR6, due to the fact that it fully fulfilled the astrometry criteria (as well as the other criteria), and was also listed as a member by Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018). We also accepted one marginal metallicity member (07521722-3831323) deviating 0.20 dex from the mean of the cluster, as it fulfilled all other criteria, and is listed as a member by Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018). Regarding previous membership selections from the literature, we found three stars in common with Eigenbrod et al. (2004), 10 stars in Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018), and seven stars in Jadhav et al. (2021). We note that this is one of the three clusters out of our sample of 42 clusters which is not included in Jackson et al. (2021).

### * Trumpler 23

Trumpler 23 is a well-populated open cluster with an age of about 800 Myr (Jacobson et al. 2016; Magrini et al. 2017, 2018; Overbeek et al. 2017; Jackson et al. 2021).

Of the final 25 Li candidates for Trumpler 23, we discarded two stars with no astrometric and photometric Gaia data, further listed as non-members with P=0.00 by Jackson et al. (2021). As for kinematics, we also listed two stars as final candidates, RV non-members according to the initial $2\sigma$ interval, with RVs deviating up to 6 km s$^{-1}$ from the mean of the cluster, but fulfilling the rest of criteria and further listed as high-probability members by Jackson et al. (2021). Regarding previous membership selections from the literature, we firstly found nine stars in common with Jacobson et al. (2016), as well as 10 stars in Magrini et al. (2017) and Overbeek et al. (2017), and 14 stars in Sampedro et al. (2017). Finally, Jackson et al. (2021) includes all 23 of our final candidates. We note that, in spite of being listed as a non-member by Overbeek et al. (2017), we considered the UVES star 16004025-5329439 as a candidate of Trumpler 23, as opposed to a Li-rich giant non-member, given that this star fulfilled all our membership criteria, and was listed as a member by several studies, such as Magrini et al. (2017) and Jackson et al. (2021).

### * Berkeley 81

Berkeley 81 (also known as Br 81 or Be 81) in an open cluster with an age of 0.75–1 Gyr (Donati et al. 2014a; Jacobson et al. 2016; Magrini et al. 2017, 2018; Jackson et al. 2021; Romano et al. 2021).

Similarly to other clusters in this range, of the final 25 Li candidates for Berkeley 81, we discarded one star with no astrometric or photometric Gaia data (further listed as a non-member by Jackson et al. (2021)). We also considered one

UVES Li-rich giant star (19014498-0027496) as an additional candidate instead of a giant contaminant, not only because it fulfilled all of our membership criteria, but also because other studies (Jacobson et al. 2016; Magrini et al. 2017) considered it to be a member of this cluster. As for kinematics, two stars in our final selection were RV non-members according to the initial $2\sigma$ interval, with RVs deviating 11 km s$^{-1}$ from the mean of the cluster. Also listed as high-probability members by Jackson et al. (2021) and fulfilling all other criteria, we accepted them as candidates. In addition, we also accepted one star (19013633-0024141), listed as a member with P=0.99 by Jackson et al. (2021) and fulfilling all criteria except for metallicity, as it deviates more appreciably from the $3\sigma$ limit (0.43 dex from the cluster mean). On the other hand, another star we discarded for deviating appreciably from the [Fe/H] of the cluster, as it was not included in any study, and we also could not analyse this star using astrometry. Regarding previous membership selections from the literature, we firstly found seven stars in common with Magrini et al. (2015), as well as 13 stars in Jacobson et al. (2016) and Magrini et al. (2017), 10 stars in Sampedro et al. (2017), and three stars in Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018). Finally, Jackson et al. (2021) includes all 24 of our final candidates.

### NGC 2355

NGC 2355 is an open cluster in the outer part of the Galactic disc with an age of 0.8–1 Gyr (Kharchenko et al. 2005; Sampedro et al. 2017; Jackson et al. 2021; Romano et al. 2021).

Of the final 87 Li candidates for NGC 2355, we discarded one star, listed as a non-member by Jackson et al. (2021) and with no astrometric or photometric data available, as well as not fulfilling the gravity criteria. As for kinematics, 23 stars in our final selection were RV non-members according to the initial $2\sigma$ interval, with RVs deviating up to 6–8 km s$^{-1}$ from the mean of the cluster. Fulfilling the rest of membership criteria, and also listed as high-probability members by Jackson et al. (2021) with P=0.99–1.00, we accepted them as candidates as in the case of other clusters. Regarding metallicity, we accepted 10 marginal members, as well as two stars which fulfilled all criteria except for metallicity, deviating more appreciably from the $3\sigma$ limit (up to 0.25 dex from the cluster mean). All of these stars are further listed as high-probability members by Jackson et al. (2021), with P=1.00. Regarding previous membership selections from the literature, we found 64 stars in common with Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018), and Jackson et al. (2021) includes 84 of our 86 final candidates (the remaining two stars in our selection were not included in their study).

### NGC 6802

NGC 6802 is an inner disc open cluster in the constellation Fuchs, with an age of 0.9–1.0 Gyr (Jacobson et al. 2016; Magrini et al. 2017; Tang et al. 2017; Magrini et al. 2018; Jackson et al. 2021; Romano et al. 2021).

Of the final 36 Li candidates for NGC 6802, we firstly discarded four stars listed as non-members by Jackson et al. (2021) and without any astrometric or photometric Gaia data available. As for kinematics, we accepted six stars in our final selection which were RV non-members according to the initial $2\sigma$ interval, listed as high-probability members by Jackson et al. (2021) with P=0.94–0.99 and fulfilling all criteria except for the fact that their RVs deviated up to 4–17 km s$^{-1}$ from the mean of the cluster. We also note that the final selection of this cluster includes a couple of stars which present values of EW(Li) slightly larger than the rest of candidates (112–113 mÅ). These two
stars fulfil the rest of membership criteria, and one of them is also listed as a high probability member by Jackson et al. (2016) (the other one is not included in their study), and so we accepted them as final members of the cluster. Furthermore, we can also explain the higher observable values of EW(Li) of these stars considering the fact that they potentially experimented a lower rate of Li depletion due to them exhibiting values of rotation that are in the middle of the scale for this cluster (also see Paper III). Regarding previous membership selections from the literature, we found the following stars in common with several studies: Firstly, we found eight common stars with Jacobson et al. (2016) and Magrini et al. (2017), as well as 10 stars in Sampedro et al. (2017), 18 stars in Tang et al. (2017), and five common stars in Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018). Jackson et al. (2021) includes 31 of our 32 final candidates (the remaining star in our selection was not included in their study). Finally, one of the Li-rich giants in our list (J19304281+2016107) is also listed in Casey et al. (2016).

* NGC 6005

NGC 6005 is a Southern open cluster in the constellation Norma with an age of 0.97–1.20 Gyr (Jacobson et al. 2016; Magrini et al. 2017; Bossini et al. 2019; Jackson et al. 2021). Bossini et al. (2019) calculated an age of 973 ± 4 Myr for this cluster.

Of the final 55 Li candidates for NGC 6005, we discarded five stars which we were not able to analyse using astrometric and photometric *Gaia* data, and were further listed as non-members by Jackson et al. (2021). We also discarded another star which fulfilled all criteria except for metallicity. In contrast to our decision to accept stars as final candidates if they fulfil the rest of criteria apart from metallicity or log g, especially the more restrictive astrometric criteria, in this case we discarded it from the final selection on the basis of not being able to analyse it with *Gaia* data, and additionally for not being included by Jackson et al. (2021). As for kinematics, we accepted two stars which were RV non-members according to the initial $2\sigma$ interval, with RVs deviating up to 7–11 km s$^{-1}$ from the mean of the cluster, but fulfilled all other criteria and were also listed as members of the cluster by Jackson et al. (2021) with $P=0.90–0.91$. We also note that the final selection of this cluster includes three stars which, even while presenting values of EW(Li) slightly larger than the rest of candidates (102–118 mÅ), fulfil the rest of membership criteria, are listed as high probability members by Jackson et al. (2016), and could also be experiencing a slower rate of Li depletion caused by rotation values that are in the middle of the scale for this cluster. Finally, we also accepted eight marginal members (deviating up to 0.30–0.50 dex from the mean of the cluster), as they fulfilled all other criteria, and are listed as high-probability members by Jackson et al. (2021), with $P=0.90–0.99$.

Regarding previous membership selections from the literature, we found the following stars in common with several studies: Firstly, we found 12 common stars with Jacobson et al. (2016), as well as seven stars in Magrini et al. (2017), 11 stars in Sampedro et al. (2017), and 12 common stars in Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018). Jackson et al. (2021) includes all 49 of our final candidates. As already discussed in Sect. 3.4, we also note that we seem to find some inconsistencies when plotting the Li-rich giant outliers selected in the field of this cluster in the CMD diagram, with all three of them appearing among the non-giant cluster candidates. However, when plotting them in the Kiel diagram the expected distinction is found between the non-giant cluster candidates and the Li-rich giant outliers.

* Pismis 18

Pismis 18 is a Southern open cluster with an age of 1.2 Gyr (Jacobson et al. 2016; Magrini et al. 2017, 2018; Jackson et al. 2021).

Of the final 12 Li candidates for Pismis 18, we firstly accepted one star in our final selection which fulfilled all criteria listed as a member of the cluster by Jackson et al. (2021) with $P=0.98$, but was a RV non-member according to the initial $2\sigma$ interval, with a RV deviating up to 6 km s$^{-1}$ from the mean of the cluster. We also discarded two stars with no astrometric and photometric *Gaia* data available, further listed as non-members by Jackson et al. (2021). Regarding previous membership selections from the literature, we found the following stars in common with several studies: Firstly, we found five common stars with Jacobson et al. (2016), as well as three stars in Magrini et al. (2017), and all of our 10 stars are listed in Hatzidimitriou et al. (2019). Jackson et al. (2021) also includes all 10 of our final candidates.

* Melotte 71

Melotte 71 (also known as Mel 71) is an open cluster between the inner and outer disc. Bossini et al. (2019) calculated an age of 1294 ± 89 Myr for this cluster, while Netopil et al. (2016) listed an age of 0.7 Gyr.

Regarding previous membership selections from the literature for Melotte 71, we found three stars in common with Sampedro et al. (2017), and four common stars in Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018). We note that this is one of the three clusters out of our sample of 42 clusters which is not included in Jackson et al. (2021).

* Pismis 15

Pismis 15 is an open cluster with an age of 1.3 Gyr (Carraro et al. 2005; Kharchenko et al. 2005; Sampedro et al. 2017; Liu & Pang 2019; Jackson et al. 2021).

Among the final 33 Li candidates for Pismis 15, we accepted a star which fulfilled all criteria except for metallicity, deviating more appreciably from the $3\sigma$ limit (0.66 dex from the cluster mean). This star is further listed as a member by Jackson et al. (2021), with $P=0.99$. We also discarded two stars with no astrometric or photometric *Gaia* data, listed as non-members by Jackson et al. (2021). We also note that the final selection of this cluster includes eight stars which present values of EW(Li) slightly larger than the rest of candidates (92–147 mÅ), albeit without exhibiting appreciable dispersion with respect to the other members, fulfilling the rest of membership criteria, and also being listed as high probability members by Jackson et al. (2016) with $P=0.98–0.99$. Furthermore, a couple of these stars also exhibit high values of rotation according to the range observed for this cluster. The effects of rotation could thus also explain the higher values of EW(Li) of these stars, as we could explain them as members of Pismis 15 exhibiting a slightly slower rate of Li depletion as a result of being faster rotators. Regarding previous membership selections from the literature, we found five common stars with Sampedro et al. (2017), as well as 15 stars in Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018). Jackson et al. (2021) includes all 31 of our final candidates.

* Trumpler 20

Trumpler 20 is an open cluster located towards the Galactic centre, with an age of 1.4–1.8 Gyr (Donati et al. 2014b; Jacobson et al. 2016; Magrini et al. 2017; Jackson et al. 2021; Romano et al. 2021).

Of the final 116 Li candidates for Trumpler 20, we firstly discarded 12 stars, listed as non-members by Jackson et al. (2021),
with no astrometric Gaia data available; as well as another star which fulfilled all criteria except for metallicity (but lacked Gaia data), and was listed as a definite non-member by Jackson et al. (2021). As for kinematics, we accepted five stars, all of them listed as members of the cluster by Jackson et al. (2021) with P=0.87–0.98, albeit being RV non-members according to the initial $2\sigma$ interval, with RVs deviating up to $10 \text{ km s}^{-1}$ from the mean of the cluster. As for metallicity, we also accepted 10 marginal members (deviating up to 0.20–0.40 dex from the mean of the cluster). All of these stars fulfilled the rest of criteria, and all are further listed as members by Jackson et al. (2021), with P=0.87–0.99.

Thee final selection for this cluster also includes a number of stars which present values of EW(Li) somewhat larger than the rest of candidates (90–120 $\text{m}\AA$), albeit without showing an appreciable dispersion with respect to the other members, and also fulfilling all other criteria, and listed as high probability members by Jackson et al. (2016) with P=0.89–0.99. Furthermore, we may also explain the higher observable values of EW(Li) of several of these stars seeing as they also exhibit values of rotation that are in the middle and high end of the scale for this cluster, thus potentially making them cluster members that have experienced a slower rate of Li depletion as a result (see Paper III). Finally, we also find one star (12400449-6036566) which also exhibits a high EW(Li) (137 $\text{m}\AA$) and stands apart from the rest of the candidates. We listed this star as a Li-rich candidate of the cluster. This star fulfilled the rest of our criteria, and it is also listed as a Li-rich member by Smiljanic et al. (2016).

Regarding previous membership selections from the literature, we found the following stars in common with several studies: Firstly, we found 97 common stars with Donati et al. (2014b), as well as 23 stars in Tautvaišienė et al. (2015), 23 stars in Jacobson et al. (2016), 23 stars in Smiljanic et al. (2016), 17 stars in Magrini et al. (2017), 31 stars in Sampedro et al. (2017), and 42 stars in Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018). Finally, Jackson et al. (2021) includes all but one of our 104 final candidates. The remaining star in our selection fulfils all of our criteria in spite of being listed as a non-member in Jackson et al. (2021). Once again, the reason for these individual deviations between our two analyses probably originates from the existing differences regarding criteria limits or the weight of the factors implicated in the decision to accept or discard stars as final candidates.

## * Berkeley 44

Berkeley 44 (also known as Br 44) is an open cluster with a dense background field and an age of 1.4–1.6 Gyr (Hayes & Friel 2014; Jacobson et al. 2016; Magrini et al. 2017, 2018; Jackson et al. 2021; Romano et al. 2021).

Of the final 31 Li candidates for Berkeley 44, we discarded one star which we could not analyse with Gaia astrometric data, also listed as a non-member by Jackson et al. (2021). On the other hand, we accepted five stars, listed as members of the cluster by Jackson et al. (2021) with P=0.86–0.99 and fulfilling all other criteria, which were RV non-members according to the initial $2\sigma$ interval, with RVs deviating up to $3–4 \text{ km s}^{-1}$ from the mean of the cluster. We also accepted one marginal metallicity member (deviating 0.29 dex from the mean of the cluster), as it fulfilled all other criteria and is listed as a high-probability member by Jackson et al. (2021), with P=1.00. Regarding previous membership selections from the literature, we found the following stars in common with several studies: Firstly, we found three common stars with Jacobson et al. (2016) and Magrini et al. (2017), as well as eight stars in Sampedro et al.

(2017), and 20 stars in Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018). Finally, Jackson et al. (2021) includes all 30 of our final candidates.

## * NGC 2243

NGC 2243 is a rich open cluster in the constellation of Canis Major, with an age in the range of 3.8–4.4 Gyr (Richer et al. 1998; Jacobson et al. 2011; Heiter et al. 2014; Magrini et al. 2017, 2018; Jackson et al. 2021; Romano et al. 2021). NGC 2243 is one of the most metal-poor clusters known, with a [Fe/H] value of -0.38 ± 0.04 dex (Magrini et al. 2017, 2018). We note that for the individual figures of this cluster (see Appendix B), due to the low metallicity of this cluster we considered PARSEC isochrones with Z=0.006 instead of the usual near-solar metallicity of Z=0.019 we used for the rest of the clusters in our sample.

Regarding kinematics, 36 stars in our final selection for NGC 2243 were RV non-members according to the initial $2\sigma$ interval, with RVs deviating up to $8 \text{ km s}^{-1}$ from the mean of the cluster. As in the case of other cluster analyses, we accepted both of them as final members, and both stars were also listed as members of the cluster by Jackson et al. (2021) with P=0.93–1.00. We also accepted 13 marginal metallicity members (deviating up to 0.50 dex from the mean of the cluster), as well as three additional stars which deviated more appreciably from the $3\sigma$ limit (up to 0.60–0.80 dex from the cluster mean). All of these stars fulfilled all other criteria and all but one are further listed as high-probability members by Jackson et al. (2021), with P=0.99–1.00.

Regarding previous membership selections from the literature, we found the following stars in common with several studies: Firstly, we found nine common stars with Jacobson et al. (2011), as well as one star in Heiter et al. (2014), 13 stars in Magrini et al. (2017), 42 stars in Sampedro et al. (2017), and 178 stars in Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018). Finally, Jackson et al. (2021) includes all but one of our 289 of our final candidates (the remaining star in our selection was not included in their study). Given that NGC 2243 and M67 are very close age-wise, we also note that we additionally made use of the Li envelope created by our candidate selection for M67 (see Paper III, as well as former M67 attested members, to help confirm the membership of our selection for NGC 2243. We also note that we seem to find some inconsistencies when plotting the Li-rich giant outliers selected in the field of this cluster in the CMD diagram, with five of them appearing among the non-giant cluster candidates. However, when plotting them in the Kiel diagram the expected distinction is found between the non-giant cluster candidates and the Li-rich giant outliers.

## * M67

M67 (also known as Messier 67 or NGC 2682) is an open cluster in the constellation of Cancer, with an age in the range of 3.6–4.5 Gyr, an age close to that of the Sun (Balachandran 1995; Richer et al. 1998; Pallavicini et al. 2005; Sestito & Randich 2005).

Eight stars in our final selection for M67 were RV non-members according to the initial $2\sigma$ interval, with RVs deviating up to $4–9 \text{ km s}^{-1}$ from the mean of the cluster, but were accepted as final members and also listed as definite candidates by Jackson et al. (2021) with P=0.99. We also accepted one marginal metallicity member (08511748+1145225), which deviates 0.14 dex from the cluster mean but fulfilled all other criteria, also being listed as a high-probability member by Jackson et al. (2021), with P=1.00. Regarding previous membership selections from the literature, we found the following stars in common with several studies: Firstly, we found 65 common
stars with Pace et al. (2012), as well as 50 stars in Pasquini et al. (2012), two stars in Carlberg (2014), 65 stars in Geller et al. (2015), 55 stars in Brucalassi et al. (2017), 74 stars in Sampedro et al. (2017), 29 stars in Jadhav et al. (2021), and seven stars in Ilin et al. (2021). Finally, Jackson et al. (2021) includes all 96 of our final candidates. We also note that in order to reinforce the membership of our GES selection we made use of several lists of M67 candidates from a series of non-GES studies (Hobbs & Pilachowski 1986; Balachandran 1995; Pallavicini et al. 1997; Pasquini et al. 1997; Jones et al. 1999; Randich et al. 2002).
**Appendix B: Cluster membership analysis:**
**Individual figures**

This appendix includes individual figures for several membership criteria discussed in Sect. 3, for all 42 clusters in the sample. For the final selection of candidate members in each cluster, we show the final RV distribution and parallax distributions, the pmra-versus-pmdec proper motions diagram, the Gaia CMD, the γ-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> and/or Kiel diagrams, and the EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram. When available, strong accreting members and Li-rich giant contaminants are further plotted alongside the candidate members. Also shown in all EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagrams are the upper envelope of EW(Li) for IC 2602 (35 Myr, red), the upper and lower envelopes of the Pleiades (78–125 Myr, grey), and the upper envelope of the Hyades (750 Myr, turquoise).
## Appendix B.1: NGC 6530

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.1. RV distribution for NGC 6530.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.2. Parallax distribution for NGC 6530.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.3. PMs diagram for NGC 6530.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_13.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.4. CMD for NGC 6530.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_14.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.5. γ index-versus-$T_{\text{eff}}$ diagram for NGC 6530.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_15.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.6. EW(Li)-versus-$T_{\text{eff}}$ diagram for NGC 6530.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.2: Rho Oph

<figure><img src="image_16.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.7. RV distribution for Rho Oph.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_17.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.8. Parallax distribution for ρ Oph.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_18.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.9. PMs diagram for ρ Oph.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_19.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.10. CMD for ρ Oph.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_20.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.11. γ index-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for ρ Oph.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_21.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.12. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for ρ Oph.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.3: Trumpler 14

<figure><img src="image_22.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.13. RV distribution for Trumpler 14.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_23.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.14. Parallax distribution for Trumpler 14.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_24.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.15. PMs diagram for Trumpler 14.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_25.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.16. CMD for Trumpler 14.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_26.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.17. γ index-versus-$T_{\text{eff}}$ diagram for Trumpler 14.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_27.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.18. EW(Li)-versus-$T_{\text{eff}}$ diagram for Trumpler 14.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.4: Cha I

<figure><img src="image_28.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.19. RV distribution for Cha I.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_29.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.20. Parallax distribution for Cha I.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_30.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.21. PMs diagram for Cha I.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_31.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.22. CMD for Cha I.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_32.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.23. γ index-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for Cha I.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_33.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.24. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for Cha I.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.5: NGC 2244

<figure><img src="image_34.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.25. RV distribution for NGC 2244.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_35.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.26. Parallax distribution for NGC 2244.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_36.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.27. PMs diagram for NGC 2244.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_37.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.28. CMD for NGC 2244.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_38.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.29. γ index-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 2244.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_39.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.30. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 2244.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.6: NGC 2264

<figure><img src="image_40.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.31. RV distribution for NGC 2264.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_41.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.32. Parallax distribution for NGC 2264.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_42.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.33. PMs diagram for NGC 2264.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_43.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.34. CMD for NGC 2264.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_44.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.35. γ index-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 2264.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_45.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.36. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 2264.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.7: λ Ori

<figure><img src="image_46.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.37. RV distribution for λ Ori.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_47.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.38. Parallax distribution for λ Ori.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_48.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.39. PMs diagram for λ Ori.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_49.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.40. CMD for λ Ori.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_50.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.41. γ index-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for λ Ori.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_51.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.42. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for λ Ori.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.8: Col 197

<figure><img src="image_52.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.43. RV distribution for Col 197.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_53.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.44. Parallax distribution for Col 197.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_54.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.45. PMs diagram for Col 197.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_55.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.46. CMD for Col 197.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_56.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.47. γ index-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for Col 197.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_57.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.48. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for Col 197.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.9: γ Vel

<figure><img src="image_58.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.49. PMs diagram for γ Vel.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_59.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.50. CMD for γ Vel.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_60.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.51. γ index-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for γ Vel.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_61.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.52. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for γ Vel.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.10: NGC 2232

<figure><img src="image_62.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.53. RV distribution for NGC 2232.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_63.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.54. Parallax distribution for NGC 2232.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_64.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.55. PMs diagram for NGC 2232.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_65.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.56. CMD for NGC 2232.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_66.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.57. γ index-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 2232.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_67.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.58. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 2232.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.11: NGC 2547

<figure><img src="image_68.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.59. PMs diagram for NGC 2547.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_69.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.60. CMD for NGC 2547.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_70.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.61. γ index-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 2547.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_71.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.62. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 2547.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.12: IC 2391

<figure><img src="image_72.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.63. RV distribution for IC 2391.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_73.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.64. Parallax distribution for IC 2391.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_74.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.65. PMs diagram for IC 2391.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_75.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.66. CMD for IC 2391.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_76.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.67. γ index-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for IC 2391.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_77.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.68. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for IC 2391.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.13: IC 2602

<figure><img src="image_78.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.69. RV distribution for IC 2602.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_79.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.70. Parallax distribution for IC 2602.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_80.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.71. PMs diagram for IC 2602.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_81.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.72. CMD for IC 2602.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_82.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.73. γ index-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for IC 2602.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_83.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.74. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for IC 2602.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.14: IC 4665

<figure><img src="image_84.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.75. RV distribution for IC 4665.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_85.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.76. Parallax distribution for IC 4665.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_86.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.77. PMs diagram for IC 4665.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_87.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.78. CMD for IC 4665.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_88.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.79. γ index-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for IC 4665.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_89.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.80. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for IC 4665.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.15: NGC 2451

<figure><img src="image_90.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.81. PMs diagram for NGC 2451.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_91.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.82. CMD for NGC 2451.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_92.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.83. γ index-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 2451.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_93.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.84. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 2451.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.16: NGC 6405

<figure><img src="image_94.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.85. RV distribution for NGC 6405.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_95.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.86. Parallax distribution for NGC 6405.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_96.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.87. PMs diagram for NGC 6405.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_97.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.88. CMD for NGC 6405.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_98.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.89. Kiel diagram for NGC 6405.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_99.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.90. EW(Li)-versus-$T_{eff}$ diagram for NGC 6405.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.17: Blanco 1

<figure><img src="image_100.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.91. RV distribution for Blanco 1.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_101.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.92. Parallax distribution for Blanco 1.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_102.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.93. PMs diagram for Blanco 1.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_103.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.94. CMD for Blanco 1.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_104.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.95. Kiel diagram for Blanco 1.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_105.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.96. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for Blanco 1.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.18: NGC 6067

<figure><img src="image_106.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.97. RV distribution for NGC 6067.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_107.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.98. Parallax distribution for NGC 6067.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_108.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.99. PMs diagram for NGC 6067.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_109.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.100. CMD for NGC 6067.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_110.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.101. Kiel diagram for NGC 6067.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_111.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.102. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 6067.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.19: NGC 6649

<figure><img src="image_112.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.103. PMs diagram for NGC 6649.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_113.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.104. CMD for NGC 6649.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_114.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.105. Kiel diagram for NGC 6649.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_115.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.106. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 6649.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.20: NGC 2516

<figure><img src="image_116.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.107. RV distribution for NGC 2516.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_117.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.108. Parallax distribution for NGC 2516.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_118.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.109. PMs diagram for NGC 2516.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_119.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.110. CMD for NGC 2516.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_120.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.111. Kiel diagram for NGC 2516.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_121.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.112. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 2516.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.21: NGC 6709

<figure><img src="image_122.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.113. RV distribution for NGC 6709.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_123.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.114. Parallax distribution for NGC 6709.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_124.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.115. PMs diagram for NGC 6709.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_125.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.116. CMD for NGC 6709.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_126.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.117. Kiel diagram for NGC 6709.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_127.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.118. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 6709.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.22: NGC 6259

<figure><img src="image_128.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.119. RV distribution for NGC 6259.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_129.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.120. Parallax distribution for NGC 6259.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_130.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.121. PMs diagram for NGC 6259.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_131.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.122. CMD for NGC 6259.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_132.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.123. Kiel diagram for NGC 6259.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_133.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.124. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 6259.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.23: NGC 6705

<figure><img src="image_134.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.125. RV distribution for NGC 6705.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_135.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.126. Parallax distribution for NGC 6705.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_136.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.127. PMs diagram for NGC 6705.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_137.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.128. CMD for NGC 6705.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_138.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.129. Kiel diagram for NGC 6705.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_139.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.130. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 6705.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.24: Berkeley 30

<figure><img src="image_140.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.131. RV distribution for Berkeley 30.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_141.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.132. Parallax distribution for Berkeley 30.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_142.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.133. PMs diagram for Berkeley 30.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_143.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.134. CMD for Berkeley 30.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_144.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.135. Kiel diagram for Berkeley 30.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_145.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.136. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for Berkeley 30.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.25: NGC 6281

<figure><img src="image_146.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.137. RV distribution for NGC 6281.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_147.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.138. Parallax distribution for NGC 6281.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_148.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.139. PMs diagram for NGC 6281.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_149.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.140. CMD for NGC 6281.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_150.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.141. Kiel diagram for NGC 6281.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_151.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.142. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 6281.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.26: NGC 3532

<figure><img src="image_152.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.143. RV distribution for NGC 3532.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_153.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.144. Parallax distribution for NGC 3532.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_154.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.145. PMs diagram for NGC 3532.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_155.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.146. CMD for NGC 3532.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_156.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.147. Kiel diagram for NGC 3532.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_157.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.148. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 3532.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.27: NGC 4815

<figure><img src="image_158.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.149. RV distribution for NGC 4815.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_159.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.150. Parallax distribution for NGC 4815.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_160.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.151. PMs diagram for NGC 4815.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_161.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.152. CMD for NGC 4815.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_162.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.153. Kiel diagram for NGC 4815.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_163.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.154. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 4815.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.28: NGC 6633

<figure><img src="image_164.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.155. RV distribution for NGC 6633.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_165.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.156. Parallax distribution for NGC 6633.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_166.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.157. PMs diagram for NGC 6633.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_167.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.158. CMD for NGC 6633.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_168.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.159. Kiel diagram for NGC 6633.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_169.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.160. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 6633.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.29: NGC 2477

<figure><img src="image_170.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.161. RV distribution for NGC 2477.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_171.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.162. Parallax distribution for NGC 2477.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_172.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.163. PMs diagram for NGC 2477.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_173.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.164. CMD for NGC 2477.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_174.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.165. Kiel diagram for NGC 2477.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_175.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.166. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 2477.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.30: Trumpler 23

<figure><img src="image_176.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.167. RV distribution for Trumpler 23.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_177.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.168. Parallax distribution for Trumpler 23.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_178.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.169. PMs diagram for Trumpler 23.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_179.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.170. CMD for Trumpler 23.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_180.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.171. Kiel diagram for Trumpler 23.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_181.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.172. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for Trumpler 23.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.31: Berkeley 81

<figure><img src="image_182.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.173. RV distribution for Berkeley 81.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_183.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.174. Parallax distribution for Berkeley 81.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_184.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.175. PMs diagram for Berkeley 81.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_185.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.176. CMD for Berkeley 81.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_186.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.177. Kiel diagram for Berkeley 81.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_187.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.178. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for Berkeley 81.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.32: NGC 2355

<figure><img src="image_188.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.179. RV distribution for NGC 2355.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_189.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.180. Parallax distribution for NGC 2355.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_190.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.181. PMs diagram for NGC 2355.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_191.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.182. CMD for NGC 2355.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_192.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.183. Kiel diagram for NGC 2355.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_193.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.184. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 2355.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.33: NGC 6802

<figure><img src="image_194.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.185. RV distribution for NGC 6802.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_195.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.186. Parallax distribution for NGC 6802.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_196.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.187. PMs diagram for NGC 6802.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_197.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.188. CMD for NGC 6802.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_198.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.189. Kiel diagram for NGC 6802.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_199.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.190. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 6802.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.34: NGC 6005

<figure><img src="image_200.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.191. RV distribution for NGC 6005.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_201.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.192. Parallax distribution for NGC 6005.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_202.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.193. PMs diagram for NGC 6005.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_203.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.194. CMD for NGC 6005.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_204.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.195. Kiel diagram for NGC 6005.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_205.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.196. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 6005.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.35: Pismis 18

<figure><img src="image_206.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.197. RV distribution for Pismis 18.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_207.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.198. Parallax distribution for Pismis 18.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_208.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.199. PMs diagram for Pismis 18.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_209.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.200. CMD for Pismis 18.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_210.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.201. Kiel diagram for Pismis 18.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_211.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.202. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for Pismis 18.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.36: Melotte 71

<figure><img src="image_212.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.203. RV distribution for Melotte 71.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_213.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.204. Parallax distribution for Melotte 71.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_214.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.205. PMs diagram for Melotte 71.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_215.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.206. CMD for Melotte 71.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_216.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.207. Kiel diagram for Melotte 71.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_217.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.208. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for Melotte 71.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.37: Pismis 15

<figure><img src="image_218.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.209. RV distribution for Pismis 15.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_219.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.210. Parallax distribution for Pismis 15.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_220.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.211. PMs diagram for Pismis 15.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_221.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.212. CMD for Pismis 15.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_222.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.213. Kiel diagram for Pismis 15.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_223.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.214. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for Pismis 15.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.38: Trumpler 20

<figure><img src="image_224.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.215. RV distribution for Trumpler 20.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_225.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.216. Parallax distribution for Trumpler 20.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_226.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.217. PMs diagram for Trumpler 20.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_227.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.218. CMD for Trumpler 20.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_228.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.219. Kiel diagram for Trumpler 20.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_229.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.220. EW(Li)-versus-$T_{\text{eff}}$ diagram for Trumpler 20.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.39: Berkeley 44

<figure><img src="image_230.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.221. RV distribution for Berkeley 44.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_231.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.222. Parallax distribution for Berkeley 44.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_232.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.223. PMs diagram for Berkeley 44.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_233.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.224. CMD for Berkeley 44.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_234.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.225. Kiel diagram for Berkeley 44.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_235.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.226. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for Berkeley 44.</figcaption></figure>
## Appendix B.40: NGC 2243

<figure><img src="image_236.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.227. RV distribution for NGC 2243.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_237.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.228. Parallax distribution for NGC 2243.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_238.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.229. PMs diagram for NGC 2243.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_239.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.230. CMD for NGC 2243.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_240.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.231. Kiel diagram for NGC 2243.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_241.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.232. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for NGC 2243.</figcaption></figure>
Appendix B.41: M67

<figure><img src="image_242.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.233. RV distribution for M67.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_243.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.234. Parallax distribution for M67.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_244.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.235. PMs diagram for M67.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_245.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.236. CMD for M67.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_246.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.237. Kiel diagram for M67.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_247.png" /><figcaption>Fig. B.238. EW(Li)-versus-T<sub>eff</sub> diagram for M67.</figcaption></figure>
**Appendix C: Cluster membership and final selections: Long tables**

This appendix describes the long tables containing all the parameters from GES and Gaia which we have used throughout this work, as well as the tables summarizing the membership analysis of Sect. 3 and the final cluster selections for each of the 42 clusters in the sample. The full tables for all sample clusters are available in electronic form at the CDS via anonymous ftp to http://cdsarc.u-strasbg.fr/ (130.79.128.5) or via http://cdsweb.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/qcat?J/A+A/.

The columns for each table are described as follows:
<table><caption>**Table C.1. GES parameters** (see the exemplified Tables C.4 and C.5 for cluster NGC 2516).</caption><thead><tr><th>Column name</th><th>Description</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>CNAME</td><td>GES object name from coordinates</td></tr><tr><td>RA</td><td>Right ascension in J2000 (hrs)</td></tr><tr><td>DEC</td><td>Declination in J2000 (deg)</td></tr><tr><td>VRAD</td><td>Radial velocity (km s<sup>-1</sup>)</td></tr><tr><td>E_VRAD</td><td>Error in radial velocity (km s<sup>-1</sup>)</td></tr><tr><td>VSINI</td><td>vsini rotational velocity (km s<sup>-1</sup>)</td></tr><tr><td>E_VSINI</td><td>Error in vsini (km s<sup>-1</sup>)</td></tr><tr><td>TEFF</td><td>Effective temperature T<sub>eff</sub> (K)</td></tr><tr><td>E_TEFF</td><td>Error in T<sub>eff</sub> (K)</td></tr><tr><td>TEFF_IRFM</td><td>Infrared photometric temperature (K)<sup>a</sup></td></tr><tr><td>E_TEFF_IRFM</td><td>Error in infrared photometric temperature (K)</td></tr><tr><td>LOGG</td><td>logg surface gravity (dex)<sup>b</sup></td></tr><tr><td>E_LOGG</td><td>Error in logg (dex)</td></tr><tr><td>GAMMA</td><td>γ index<sup>c</sup> (dex)</td></tr><tr><td>E_GAMMA</td><td>Error in γ index (dex)</td></tr><tr><td>FEH</td><td>[Fe/H] metallicity (dex)</td></tr><tr><td>E_FEH</td><td>Error in [Fe/H] metallicity (dex)</td></tr><tr><td>EWC_LI</td><td>Blends-corrected values of EW(Li) (mÅ)</td></tr><tr><td>E_EWC_LI</td><td>Error in EW(Li) (mÅ)</td></tr><tr><td>LIM_EWC_LI</td><td>Flag for blends-corrected EW(Li) error<sup>d</sup></td></tr><tr><td>EW_LI_UNVEIL</td><td>The primarily-used veiling-corrected values of EW(Li) (mÅ)</td></tr><tr><td>E_EW_LI_UNVEIL</td><td>Error in EW(Li) (mÅ)</td></tr><tr><td>LIM_EW_LI_UNVEIL</td><td>Flag for veiling-corrected EW(Li) errors<sup>d</sup></td></tr><tr><td>LI1</td><td>A(Li) neutral Li abundances in logε(X) (dex)</td></tr><tr><td>E_LI1</td><td>Error in A(Li) (dex)</td></tr><tr><td>EW_HA_ACC</td><td>Hα EW: accretion (Å)</td></tr><tr><td>E_EW_HA_ACC</td><td>Error in Hα EW: accretion (Å)</td></tr><tr><td>HA10</td><td>Hα 10%, width of the Hα emission line at 10% peak intensity (km s<sup>-1</sup>)</td></tr><tr><td>E_HA10</td><td>Error in Hα 10% (km s<sup>-1</sup>)</td></tr><tr><td>EW_HA_CHR</td><td>Hα chromospheric activity (Å)</td></tr><tr><td>E_EW_HA_CHR</td><td>Error in Hα chromospheric activity (Å)</td></tr></tbody></table>

**Notes.** (a) Not shown in Table C.4, primarily measured for young clusters. (b) Used in this work for intermediate-age and old clusters. (c) The empirical gravity indicator defined by Damiani et al. (2014) and used in the case of the young clusters. (d) 0=no flag necessary; 1=EW(Li) corrected by blends contribution using models; 2=EW(Li) measured separately — Li line resolved, UVES only; and 3=Upper limit — no error for EW(Li) is given.
<table><caption>**Table C.2. Gaia parameters and $P_{rot}$ measurements** (see the exemplified Tables C.6 and C.7 for cluster NGC 2516).</caption><thead><tr><th>Column name</th><th>Description</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>CNAME</td><td>GES object name from coordinates</td></tr><tr><td>parallax</td><td>π parallax (mas)</td></tr><tr><td>parallax_error</td><td>Error in parallax (mas)</td></tr><tr><td>pmra</td><td>pmra, PM in RA (mas yr<sup>-1</sup>)</td></tr><tr><td>pmra_error</td><td>Error in pmra (mas yr<sup>-1</sup>)</td></tr><tr><td>pmdec</td><td>pmdec, PM in DEC (mas yr<sup>-1</sup>)</td></tr><tr><td>pmdec_error</td><td>Error in pmdec (mas yr<sup>-1</sup>)</td></tr><tr><td>ruwe</td><td>RUWE renormalized unit weight error</td></tr><tr><td>phot_g_mean_mag</td><td>G photometric band (mag)</td></tr><tr><td>phot_bp_mean_mag</td><td>G<sub>BP</sub> photometric band (mag)</td></tr><tr><td>phot RP_mean_mag</td><td>G<sub>RP</sub> photometric band (mag)</td></tr><tr><td>phot_g_mean_mag_error</td><td>Error in G photometric band (mag)</td></tr><tr><td>phot_bp_mean_mag_error</td><td>Error in G<sub>BP</sub> photometric band (mag)</td></tr><tr><td>phot RP_mean_mag_error</td><td>Error in G<sub>RP</sub> photometric band (mag)</td></tr><tr><td>bp RP</td><td>Obtained Gaia G<sub>bp-rp</sub> colour index (mag)</td></tr><tr><td>Mg</td><td>Obtained absolute magnitude M<sub>G</sub> (mag)</td></tr><tr><td>Prot</td><td>P<sub>rot</sub> measurements, when available (d)</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>**Table C.3. Membership analysis and candidate selections** (see the exemplified Table C.8 for cluster NGC 2516).</caption><thead><tr><th>Column name</th><th>Description</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>CNAME</td><td>GES object name from coordinates</td></tr><tr><td>RV_mem</td><td>Membership: RV</td></tr><tr><td>PM_mem</td><td>Membership: Proper motions</td></tr><tr><td>Parallax_mem</td><td>Membership: Parallax</td></tr><tr><td>CMD_mem</td><td>Membership: CMD</td></tr><tr><td>logg_mem</td><td>Membership: logg (intermediate-age and old clusters)</td></tr><tr><td>gamma_mem</td><td>Membership: γ index (young clusters)</td></tr><tr><td>Met_mem</td><td>Membership: [Fe/H] metallicity</td></tr><tr><td>Li_mem</td><td>Membership: EW(Li)</td></tr><tr><td>Cantat_Gaudin_2018</td><td>Members from Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018)<sup>a</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Randich_2018</td><td>Members from Randich et al. (2018)<sup>a</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Jackson_2021_MEM3D</td><td>Members from Jackson et al. (2021)<sup>a, b</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Jackson_2021_MEMQG</td><td>Members from Jackson et al. (2021)<sup>a, c</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Final</td><td>Final candidate members<sup>d</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Particular cases</td><td>Final column listing particular cases<sup>e</sup></td></tr></tbody></table>

**Notes.** (a) Additional columns, whenever possible, listing candidates according to relevant Gaia studies from the literature. (b) Jackson et al. (2021) — MEM3D refers to the membership using the full data set. (c) Jackson et al. (2021) — MEMQC refers to the probability computed using data set filtered to remove targets with suspect Gaia data. (d) ‘Y’=members; ‘n’=Non-members. (e) Particular cases include the Li-rich giant outliers (listed as ‘Li-rich G’), strong accretors (‘Strong accretor’), and the SB1 and SB2 binary stars (‘SB1’ and ‘SB2’) listed by GES iDR6 and Merle et al. (2017, 2020).
<table><caption>Table C.4. NGC 2516 GES parameters (I)<sup>a</sup>.</caption><thead><tr><th>CNAME</th><th>RA (hrs)</th><th>DEC (deg)</th><th>RV (km s<sup>-1</sup>)</th><th>vsini (km s<sup>-1</sup>)</th><th>T<sub>eff</sub> (K)</th><th>log g (dex)</th><th>γ (dex)</th><th>[Fe/H]</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>07515457-6047568</td><td>117.98</td><td>-60.80</td><td>6.8 ± 0.4</td><td>11.1 ± 1.2</td><td>4369 ± 76</td><td>4.90 ± 0.18</td><td>0.920 ± 0.009</td><td>0.00 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>07515966-6047220</td><td>118.00</td><td>-60.79</td><td>25.8 ± 0.3</td><td>&lt; 7.0</td><td>4233 ± 78</td><td>4.69 ± 0.18</td><td>0.907 ± 0.005</td><td>0.06 ± 0.10</td></tr><tr><td>07520129-6043233</td><td>118.01</td><td>-60.72</td><td>14.5 ± 0.8</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>0.830 ± 0.023</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07520389-6050116</td><td>118.02</td><td>-60.84</td><td>25.5 ± 0.3</td><td>&lt; 7.0</td><td>4256 ± 76</td><td>4.90 ± 0.18</td><td>0.892 ± 0.005</td><td>0.05 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>07521002-6044245</td><td>118.04</td><td>-60.74</td><td>25.5 ± 0.3</td><td>&lt; 7.0</td><td>4153 ± 76</td><td>4.74 ± 0.18</td><td>0.893 ± 0.005</td><td>0.00 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>07521382-6047151</td><td>118.06</td><td>-60.79</td><td>24.2 ± 0.3</td><td>&lt; 7.0</td><td>3993 ± 77</td><td>4.75 ± 0.18</td><td>0.861 ± 0.007</td><td>-0.02 ± 0.10</td></tr><tr><td>07521911-6039241</td><td>118.08</td><td>-60.66</td><td>-7.4 ± 0.5</td><td>14.6 ± 2.5</td><td>3189 ± 96</td><td>4.95 ± 0.23</td><td>0.824 ± 0.015</td><td>-0.38 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>07522464-6043006</td><td>118.10</td><td>-60.72</td><td>-4.1 ± 0.6</td><td>15.5 ± 2.6</td><td>3845 ± 77</td><td>4.56 ± 0.18</td><td>0.876 ± 0.014</td><td>-0.14 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>07523060-6049134</td><td>118.13</td><td>-60.82</td><td>23.4 ± 0.4</td><td>&lt; 7.0</td><td>3444 ± 108</td><td>4.88 ± 0.24</td><td>0.812 ± 0.012</td><td>-0.29 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>07523629-6046405</td><td>118.15</td><td>-60.78</td><td>31.2 ± 0.5</td><td>&lt; 7.0</td><td>3883 ± 107</td><td>4.85 ± 0.24</td><td>0.815 ± 0.013</td><td>-0.08 ± 0.08</td></tr><tr><td>07524604-6039537</td><td>118.19</td><td>-60.66</td><td>23.7 ± 0.3</td><td>&lt; 7.0</td><td>4141 ± 76</td><td>4.76 ± 0.18</td><td>0.888 ± 0.005</td><td>0.00 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>07525994-6053288</td><td>118.25</td><td>-60.89</td><td>23.4 ± 0.3</td><td>10.0 ± 1.1</td><td>4053 ± 76</td><td>4.92 ± 0.18</td><td>0.844 ± 0.008</td><td>-0.03 ± 0.10</td></tr><tr><td>07530001-6042137</td><td>118.25</td><td>-60.70</td><td>5.7 ± 0.4</td><td>9.0 ± 1.2</td><td>3921 ± 77</td><td>4.69 ± 0.18</td><td>0.856 ± 0.009</td><td>-0.01 ± 0.10</td></tr><tr><td>07530057-6048094</td><td>118.25</td><td>-60.80</td><td>24.1 ± 0.3</td><td>9.0 ± 1.0</td><td>3913 ± 75</td><td>4.80 ± 0.18</td><td>0.838 ± 0.007</td><td>-0.08 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>07530259-6050259</td><td>118.26</td><td>-60.84</td><td>28.4 ± 1.0</td><td>84.3 ± 1.3</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>0.962 ± 0.004</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07531031-6046400</td><td>118.29</td><td>-60.78</td><td>23.3 ± 0.4</td><td>13.3 ± 1.2</td><td>3623 ± 110</td><td>4.87 ± 0.23</td><td>0.830 ± 0.012</td><td>-0.27 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>07531177-6041390</td><td>118.30</td><td>-60.69</td><td>23.4 ± 0.4</td><td>8.4 ± 1.3</td><td>3841 ± 108</td><td>4.84 ± 0.23</td><td>0.836 ± 0.010</td><td>-0.11 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>07531326-6043422</td><td>118.31</td><td>-60.73</td><td>3.6 ± 0.3</td><td>&lt; 7.0</td><td>3972 ± 77</td><td>4.79 ± 0.18</td><td>0.858 ± 0.007</td><td>0.01 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>07532107-6058131</td><td>118.34</td><td>-60.97</td><td>22.4 ± 0.5</td><td>10.5 ± 1.1</td><td>3879 ± 108</td><td>4.85 ± 0.23</td><td>0.838 ± 0.014</td><td>-0.08 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>07532163-6102129</td><td>118.34</td><td>-61.04</td><td>23.5 ± 0.4</td><td>9.3 ± 1.6</td><td>3620 ± 108</td><td>4.84 ± 0.23</td><td>0.826 ± 0.011</td><td>-0.22 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr></tbody></table>

Notes. (a) This is a truncated table showing the first 20 rows.
<table><caption>Table C.5. NGC 2516 GES parameters (II)<sup>a</sup>.</caption><thead><tr><th>CNAME</th><th>EW(Li)<br>(blends-corrected) (mÅ)</th><th>EW(Li)<br>error flag</th><th>EW(Li)<br>(veiling-corrected) (mÅ)</th><th>EW(Li)<br>error flag <sup>c</sup></th><th>A(Li)<br>(dex)</th><th>Hα<br>(accretion) (Å)</th><th>Hα 10%<br>(km s<sup>-1</sup>)</th><th>Hα<br>(activity) (Å)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>07515457-6047568</td><td>&lt; 22</td><td>3</td><td>&lt; 22</td><td>3</td><td>&lt; 0.2</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07515966-6047220</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>75 ± 5</td><td>0</td><td>0.6 ± 0.1</td><td>0.82 ± 0.07</td><td>94.81 ± 1.79</td><td>1.78 ± 0.14</td></tr><tr><td>07520129-6043233</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>108 ± 24</td><td>0</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07520389-6050116</td><td>&lt; 13</td><td>3</td><td>13 ± 6</td><td>0</td><td>&lt; -0.4</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>0.78 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>07521002-6044245</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>39 ± 6</td><td>0</td><td>-0.1 ± 0.3</td><td>0.16 ± 0.07</td><td>106.61 ± 6.58</td><td>0.92 ± 0.09</td></tr><tr><td>07521382-6047151</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>86 ± 7</td><td>0</td><td>0.4 ± 0.2</td><td>0.19 ± 0.11</td><td>119.19 ± 9.95</td><td>1.08 ± 0.14</td></tr><tr><td>07521911-6039241</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>127 ± 15</td><td>0</td><td>&lt; -1.0</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07522464-6043006</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>84 ± 15</td><td>0</td><td>0.0 ± 0.3</td><td>0.42 ± 0.32</td><td>...</td><td>1.71 ± 0.35</td></tr><tr><td>07523060-6049134</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>128 ± 13</td><td>0</td><td>-0.7 ± 0.5</td><td>0.76 ± 0.14</td><td>...</td><td>1.61 ± 0.16</td></tr><tr><td>07523629-6046405</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>117 ± 14</td><td>0</td><td>0.4 ± 0.3</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>0.18 ± 0.16</td></tr><tr><td>07524604-6039537</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>35 ± 6</td><td>0</td><td>-0.3 ± 0.4</td><td>0.25 ± 0.07</td><td>96.33 ± 2.59</td><td>1.22 ± 0.12</td></tr><tr><td>07525994-6053288</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>70 ± 8</td><td>0</td><td>0.4 ± 0.2</td><td>0.26 ± 0.09</td><td>114.25 ± 33.15</td><td>1.12 ± 0.16</td></tr><tr><td>07530001-6042137</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>80 ± 9</td><td>0</td><td>0.2 ± 0.2</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>0.09 ± 0.07</td></tr><tr><td>07530057-6048094</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>57 ± 8</td><td>0</td><td>-0.2 ± 0.3</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>0.49 ± 0.08</td></tr><tr><td>07530259-6050259</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>&lt; 9</td><td>3</td><td>...</td><td>0.45 ± 0.11</td><td>241.81 ± 37.44</td><td>1.51 ± 0.13</td></tr><tr><td>07531031-6046400</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>98 ± 13</td><td>0</td><td>-0.3 ± 0.5</td><td>1.47 ± 0.19</td><td>97.84 ± 3.38</td><td>2.59 ± 0.21</td></tr><tr><td>07531177-6041390</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>126 ± 10</td><td>0</td><td>0.5 ± 0.2</td><td>0.22 ± 0.11</td><td>92.52 ± 2.90</td><td>1.13 ± 0.16</td></tr><tr><td>07531326-6043422</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>74 ± 7</td><td>0</td><td>0.2 ± 0.2</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>0.08 ± 0.07</td></tr><tr><td>07532107-6058131</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>129 ± 14</td><td>0</td><td>0.6 ± 0.2</td><td>1.99 ± 0.27</td><td>132.89 ± 10.14</td><td>3.46 ± 0.35</td></tr><tr><td>07532163-6102129</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>101 ± 12</td><td>0</td><td>-0.5 ± 0.6</td><td>2.14 ± 0.19</td><td>119.94 ± 6.70</td><td>3.28 ± 0.36</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr></tbody></table>

Notes. (a) This is a truncated table showing the first 20 rows.
<table><caption>Table C.6. NGC 2516 Gaia parameters<sup>a</sup>.</caption><thead><tr><th>CNAME</th><th>π<br>(mas)</th><th>pmra<br>(mas yr<sup>-1</sup>)</th><th>pmdec<br>(mas yr<sup>-1</sup>)</th><th>RUWE<br>error</th><th>G<br>(mag)</th><th>G<sub>BP</sub><br>(mag)</th><th>G<sub>RP</sub><br>(mag)</th><th>G<sub>BP-RP</sub><br>(mag)</th><th>M<sub>G</sub><br>(mag)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>07515457-6047568</td><td>2.560 ± 0.027</td><td>-5.73 ± 0.04</td><td>10.74 ± 0.03</td><td>1.0</td><td>15.752 ± 0.003</td><td>16.573 ± 0.004</td><td>14.868 ± 0.004</td><td>1.71</td><td>7.79</td></tr><tr><td>07515966-6047220</td><td>2.435 ± 0.032</td><td>-3.93 ± 0.04</td><td>11.10 ± 0.04</td><td>1.0</td><td>15.965 ± 0.003</td><td>16.848 ± 0.006</td><td>15.037 ± 0.004</td><td>1.81</td><td>7.90</td></tr><tr><td>07520129-6043233</td><td>2.111 ± 0.061</td><td>-24.60 ± 0.09</td><td>28.61 ± 0.08</td><td>1.0</td><td>17.420 ± 0.003</td><td>18.653 ± 0.017</td><td>16.347 ± 0.006</td><td>2.31</td><td>9.04</td></tr><tr><td>07520389-6050116</td><td>2.462 ± 0.028</td><td>-4.19 ± 0.04</td><td>11.49 ± 0.03</td><td>1.0</td><td>15.928 ± 0.003</td><td>16.807 ± 0.005</td><td>15.012 ± 0.004</td><td>1.79</td><td>7.88</td></tr><tr><td>07521002-6044245</td><td>2.403 ± 0.032</td><td>-4.83 ± 0.04</td><td>11.49 ± 0.04</td><td>1.1</td><td>16.087 ± 0.003</td><td>16.998 ± 0.006</td><td>15.149 ± 0.004</td><td>1.85</td><td>7.99</td></tr><tr><td>07521382-6047151</td><td>2.457 ± 0.042</td><td>-4.62 ± 0.06</td><td>10.61 ± 0.05</td><td>1.0</td><td>16.604 ± 0.003</td><td>17.642 ± 0.008</td><td>15.599 ± 0.005</td><td>2.04</td><td>8.56</td></tr><tr><td>07521911-6039241</td><td>3.613 ± 0.073</td><td>-16.21 ± 0.11</td><td>2.75 ± 0.09</td><td>1.0</td><td>17.731 ± 0.003</td><td>19.182 ± 0.020</td><td>16.564 ± 0.006</td><td>2.62</td><td>10.52</td></tr><tr><td>07522464-6043006</td><td>3.367 ± 0.357</td><td>-1.59 ± 0.50</td><td>0.76 ± 0.45</td><td>6.0</td><td>17.814 ± 0.003</td><td>18.607 ± 0.016</td><td>16.330 ± 0.006</td><td>2.28</td><td>10.45</td></tr><tr><td>07523060-6049134</td><td>2.401 ± 0.068</td><td>-4.60 ± 0.10</td><td>11.72 ± 0.08</td><td>1.0</td><td>17.514 ± 0.003</td><td>18.877 ± 0.024</td><td>16.376 ± 0.006</td><td>2.50</td><td>9.42</td></tr><tr><td>07523629-6046405</td><td>1.731 ± 0.063</td><td>-3.34 ± 0.09</td><td>-0.66 ± 0.10</td><td>0.9</td><td>17.441 ± 0.003</td><td>18.664 ± 0.022</td><td>16.370 ± 0.006</td><td>2.29</td><td>8.63</td></tr><tr><td>07524604-6039537</td><td>2.443 ± 0.030</td><td>-3.98 ± 0.04</td><td>10.94 ± 0.04</td><td>1.0</td><td>16.127 ± 0.003</td><td>17.047 ± 0.007</td><td>15.183 ± 0.005</td><td>1.86</td><td>8.07</td></tr><tr><td>07525994-6053288</td><td>2.500 ± 0.045</td><td>-4.32 ± 0.06</td><td>11.44 ± 0.06</td><td>1.0</td><td>16.696 ± 0.003</td><td>17.794 ± 0.009</td><td>15.666 ± 0.005</td><td>2.13</td><td>8.69</td></tr><tr><td>07530001-6042137</td><td>2.030 ± 0.043</td><td>-14.78 ± 0.06</td><td>13.56 ± 0.06</td><td>1.1</td><td>16.685 ± 0.003</td><td>17.722 ± 0.009</td><td>15.687 ± 0.004</td><td>2.03</td><td>8.22</td></tr><tr><td>07530057-6048094</td><td>2.441 ± 0.048</td><td>-4.25 ± 0.07</td><td>10.88 ± 0.07</td><td>1.1</td><td>16.779 ± 0.003</td><td>17.899 ± 0.008</td><td>15.711 ± 0.005</td><td>2.19</td><td>8.72</td></tr><tr><td>07530259-6050259</td><td>2.435 ± 0.028</td><td>-4.12 ± 0.04</td><td>10.96 ± 0.04</td><td>1.0</td><td>15.852 ± 0.003</td><td>16.709 ± 0.006</td><td>14.935 ± 0.006</td><td>1.77</td><td>7.78</td></tr><tr><td>07531031-6046400</td><td>2.531 ± 0.060</td><td>-3.41 ± 0.09</td><td>12.14 ± 0.09</td><td>0.9</td><td>17.420 ± 0.003</td><td>18.765 ± 0.022</td><td>16.297 ± 0.006</td><td>2.47</td><td>9.44</td></tr><tr><td>07531177-6041390</td><td>2.328 ± 0.049</td><td>-4.75 ± 0.07</td><td>12.04 ± 0.07</td><td>1.0</td><td>17.006 ± 0.003</td><td>18.124 ± 0.012</td><td>15.956 ± 0.006</td><td>2.17</td><td>8.84</td></tr><tr><td>07531326-6043422</td><td>2.142 ± 0.037</td><td>-2.38 ± 0.05</td><td>7.98 ± 0.06</td><td>1.0</td><td>16.508 ± 0.003</td><td>17.506 ± 0.008</td><td>15.521 ± 0.004</td><td>1.99</td><td>8.16</td></tr><tr><td>07532107-6058131</td><td>2.412 ± 0.048</td><td>-4.36 ± 0.07</td><td>11.44 ± 0.06</td><td>1.0</td><td>16.858 ± 0.003</td><td>18.016 ± 0.014</td><td>15.795 ± 0.005</td><td>2.22</td><td>8.77</td></tr><tr><td>07532163-6102129</td><td>2.392 ± 0.053</td><td>-4.02 ± 0.07</td><td>11.32 ± 0.08</td><td>1.0</td><td>17.175 ± 0.003</td><td>18.430 ± 0.017</td><td>16.080 ± 0.006</td><td>2.35</td><td>9.07</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr></tbody></table>

Notes. (a) This is a truncated table showing the first 20 rows.
<table><caption>Table C.7. NGC 2516 $P_{rot}$ measurements$^a$.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">CNAME</th><th>P<sub>rot</sub> (d)</th><th>P<sub>rot</sub> (d)</th><th>P<sub>rot</sub> (d)</th><th>P<sub>rot</sub> (d)</th></tr><tr><th>Irwin et al. (2007)</th><th>Wright et al. (2011)</th><th>Jackson et al. (2016)</th><th>Fritzewski et al. (2020)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>07515457-6047568</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07515966-6047220</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07520129-6043233</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07520389-6050116</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07521002-6044245</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07521382-6047151</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07521911-6039241</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07522464-6043006</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07523060-6049134</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07523629-6046405</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07524604-6039537</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07525994-6053288</td><td>5.66</td><td>...</td><td>5.66</td><td>5.66</td></tr><tr><td>07530001-6042137</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07530057-6048094</td><td>11.61</td><td>...</td><td>11.61</td><td>11.61</td></tr><tr><td>07530259-6050259</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>4.58</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07531031-6046400</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>2.52</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07531177-6041390</td><td>4.58</td><td>...</td><td>4.58</td><td>4.58</td></tr><tr><td>07531326-6043422</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07532107-6058131</td><td>2.52</td><td>...</td><td>2.52</td><td>2.52</td></tr><tr><td>07532163-6102129</td><td>2.34</td><td>...</td><td>2.34</td><td>2.34</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr></tbody></table>

Notes. $^{(a)}$ This is a truncated table showing the first 20 rows.
<table><caption>Table C.8. NGC 2516 membership analysis and selection<sup>a</sup>.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">CNAME</th><th rowspan="2">γ</th><th rowspan="2">RV</th><th rowspan="2">PMs</th><th colspan="2">Membership</th><th rowspan="2">[Fe/H]</th><th rowspan="2">EW(Li)</th><th rowspan="2">Cantat-Gaudin et al (2018)</th><th rowspan="2">Randich et al (2018)</th><th colspan="2">Jackson et al (2021)</th><th rowspan="2">Final members</th><th rowspan="2">Particular cases</th></tr><tr><th>π</th><th>CMD</th><th>MEM3D</th><th>MEMQG</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>07515457-6047568</td><td>N</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>N</td><td>0.5901</td><td>0.5542</td><td>n</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07515966-6047220</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>0.9991</td><td>0.9991</td><td>Y</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07520129-6043233</td><td>N</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>Y</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07520389-6050116</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>0.9997</td><td>0.9997</td><td>Y</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07521002-6044245</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>0.9998</td><td>0.9998</td><td>Y</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07521382-6047151</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>N</td><td>Y</td><td>0.9999</td><td>0.9999</td><td>Y</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07521911-6039241</td><td>N</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>N</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>n</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07522464-6043006</td><td>N</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>N</td><td>0</td><td>-1</td><td>n</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07523060-6049134</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>...</td><td>Y</td><td>0.9999</td><td>0.9999</td><td>Y</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07523629-6046405</td><td>N</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>Y</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>n</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07524604-6039537</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>0.9999</td><td>0.9999</td><td>Y</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07525994-6053288</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>Y</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07530001-6042137</td><td>N</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>N</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>n</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07530057-6048094</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>0.9999</td><td>1</td><td>Y</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07530259-6050259</td><td>N</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>0.9967</td><td>0.9971</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07531031-6046400</td><td>Y</td><td>N</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>Y</td><td>0.99</td><td>0.9854</td><td>n</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07531177-6041390</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>0.9998</td><td>0.9999</td><td>Y</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07531326-6043422</td><td>N</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>N</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>n</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07532107-6058131</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>0.9999</td><td>0.9999</td><td>Y</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>07532163-6102129</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>Y</td><td>0.9999</td><td>0.9999</td><td>Y</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr></tbody></table>

Notes. (a) This is a truncated table showing the first 20 rows.