\begin{table}%t3
\caption{\label{4:tab:res2aco}$^{12}$CO and C$^{18}$O results$^a$.}
%\centerline
 {\small \begin{tabular}{l l l l l l l l l l}
\hline \hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Source & $^{12}$CO 3--2 & & C$^{18}$O 3--2 &  & & CO 4--3 &  & CO 7--6 & \\
& $\int T_{\rm MB} {\rm d}V^d$ & $T_{\rm MB}$ &  $\int T_{\rm MB} {\rm d}V^d$ & $T_{\rm MB}$ & $\Delta$V &$\int T_{\rm MB} {\rm d}V^d$ & $T_{\rm MB}$& $\int T_{\rm MB} {\rm d}V^d$ & $T_{\rm MB}$\\ 
&  (K~km~s$^{-1}$) & (K) & (K~km~s$^{-1}$) & (K)& (km s$^{-1}$)  &  (K~km~s$^{-1}$) & (K) & (K~km~s$^{-1}$) & (K) \\
\hline
\multicolumn{9}{c}{Chamaeleon} \\
%\hline
Ced 110 IRS 4   &30.7 & 7.5 & 3.7 & 2.1 & 1.5 & 29.8 & 7.5 & 24.8 & 6.9 \\
Ced 110 IRS 6  & 20.0 & 9.3 & 1.6 & 1.4 & 1.1 & 9.7 & 4.9 & 8.8 & 2.5 \\
Cha IRS 6a  & -- & -- & 1.2 & 1.1& 1.0 &-- & -- & -- & -- \\
Cha IRN & 11.1 & 3.5 & 2.3 & 1.8& 1.2 & 6.5 & 3.0 & 14.0 & 5.2 \\
Cha INa 2 & 11.3 & 6.7 &  1.3 & 1.6 &0.8 & 10.0 & 4.7 & $<$1.5 & -- \\
\hline
\multicolumn{9}{c}{Corona australis} \\
% \hline
CrA IRAS 32 & 51.6 & 11.0 & 4.6$^e$ & 4.4 & 1.0 &-- & -- & -- & -- \\
HH 100-off & 102.6 & 24.7 & 6.3 & 5.2& 1.1 &-- & -- & -- & -- \\
RCrA IRS 5 & 144.2 & 29.9 & 11.4 & 8.7& 1.2 &-- & -- & -- & -- \\
RCrA IRS 7A & 406.0 & 46.4 & 22.5 & 8.9& 2.2 &-- & -- & -- & -- \\
RCrA IRS 7B & 332.7 & 40.4 & 23.0 & 10.0& 2.2 &-- & -- & -- & -- \\
RCrA TS 3.5 & 16.8 & 6.4 & $<$0.3 & -- & -- &-- & -- & -- & -- \\
\hline
\multicolumn{9}{c}{Isolated} \\
% \hline
HH 46$^c$ & 82.5 & 19.4 & 3.2 & 3.3& 0.9 &70.5 & 14.9 & 46.5 & 8.6 \\
IRAS 07178-4429 & 24.0 & 11.4 & 1.7 & 2.3& 0.7  &-- & -- & -- & -- \\
IRAS 12496-7650$^b$ &92.8 & 25 & 9.2 & 1.9 & 1.1 &90.0 & 23 & 43.7 & 19.2\\
IRAS 13546-3941 & 16.3 & 11.4 & 1.8 & 2.3& 0.7 &-- & -- & -- & -- \\
IRAS 15398-3359 & 25.8 & 9.0 & 0.5 & 1.2 & 0.4  &19.9 &5.6  & 45.3 & 8.5 \\ \hline 
\end{tabular}}
\medskip
$^a$ Integrated intensities are across the entire line profile; $^b$~from \citet{vanKempen06}; $^c$~CO 7--6 from \citet{vanKempen09a};
$^d$~calibration uncertainties estimated at 20\% dominate the uncertainty of the integrated intensity; $^e$~this is a significant discrepancy from the value reported in \citet{Schoeier06}, which determined this intensity to be 6.5~K~km~s$^{-1}$. A possible explanation can be the inaccurate calibration during science verification of \citet{Schoeier06}.
\end{table}