a The minimum light in 2001 is systematically brighter than in 1999 both in B 
a  and V, possibly indicating a Blazhko modulation.
b No reliable average magnitudes and amplitudes are available since in 1999 the 
b  star occasionally fell on a CCD bad column.
c The 2001 light curves are systematically fainter than the 1999 ones. The star 
c  could be an unresolved blend in the 1999 photometry.  Amplitudes and average 
c  luminosities are provided for the 1999 (upper line) and 2001 data (lower 
c  line), separately.
d Amplitudes and average luminosities are provided for the combined 1999 + 2001 
d  data (upper line), and for the 1999 (middle line) and 2001 data (lower line),
d  separately.
e The 2001 light curves are systematically fainter than the 1999 ones. The star 
e  could either be an unresolved blend in the 1999 photometry, or could be 
e  affected by Blazhko effect. Amplitudes correspond to the 1999 data-set.
f The 2001 light curves are systematically brighter than the 1999 ones. 
f  Amplitudes and average luminosities are provided for the 1999 (upper line) 
f  and 2001 data (lower line), separately.
g Light curves are very noisy possibly indicating the presence of secondary 
g  periodicities.
h The 2001 light curves are systematically slightly brighter than in 1999, 
h  particularly in B. Amplitudes are provided for the combined 1999 + 2001 data 
h  (upper line), and for the 1999 (middle line) and the 2001 data (lower line), 
h  separately.
i Period and shape of the 2001 light curves are slightly different than in 1999.
i  Amplitudes and average luminosities are provided for the combined 1999+2001 
i  data (upper line) and for the 2001 data (lower line), separately.
l The star was not observed in 2001.
m Amplitudes and average luminosities are provided separately for the combined 
m  1999 + 2001 data (upper line), for the 1999 data (middle line), and for the 
m  2001 data (lower line).
n The 2001 light curves are systematically fainter than the 1999 ones. 
n  Amplitudes are provided separately for the combined 1999 + 2001 data (upper 
n  line), for the 1999 data (middle line), and for the 2001 data (lower line).
o Amplitudes are from the 1999 data set (upper line), average luminosities are 
o  from the combined 1999+2001 data set (lower line).
p The star was not observed in 2001.
q The 2001 light curves are systematically fainter than the 1999 ones. 
q  Amplitudes and average luminosities are provided for the 1999 (upper line) 
q  and 2001 data (lower line), separately.
r Amplitudes and average luminosities are provided for the 1999 (upper line) and
r  2001 data (lower line), separately.
s The star does not have V observations in 2001. The 1999 B light curve has a 
s  different shape and amplitude than the 2001 one. Amplitudes and average 
s  luminosities for the 1999 data are provided in the fist line, the B amplitude
s  of the 2001 data in the second line.
t The 2001 light curves are systematically brighter and have smaller amplitudes 
t  than the 1999 ones. Both in 1999 and 2001 the V data provide a slightly 
t  different period than the B ones. Amplitudes and average luminosities are 
t  provided separately for the combined 1999 + 2001 data (upper line), for the 
t  1999 data (middle line), and for the 2001 data (lower line), and for each of 
t  the two periodicities.
u The 2001 light curves are systematically fainter than the 1999 ones. 
u  Amplitudes are provided for the combined 1999 + 2001 data (upper line), for 
u  the 1999 data (middle line), and for the 2001 data (lower line), separately.