\begin{table}%t1
%\centering
\par
\caption{Observed and fitted parameters of the \water\ and CO 5-4 lines and
prediction for the $179\mum$ \water\ line flux.}
\vspace{-1mm}
\begin{tabular}{lcccccccccc}
\hline \hline \noalign{\smallskip}
& $\water$~557~GHz &  CO 5-4 & CO 6-5$^1$ & CO 3-2$^1$ & Size &
$N$(CO)$^2$ & n($\htwo$)\tablefootmark{2} & $T$\tablefootmark{2} & $X$($\water$)\tablefootmark{3} & $F$($179\mum$)   \\
&($\K\kms$) & ($\K\kms$) & ($\K\kms$) &  $\K\kms$ & ($\arcsec$) & ($\cmmd$)& ($\cmmt$) &($\K$) & ($\cmmd$) & (W$\cmmd$)\\
\hline
LVC & 7.83 & 45.4 & 29.2 & 40.4 & 25 & 8.0(16) & (1.0-3.0)(5)  & 100 & 0.8(-6) &  4.2(-20)  \\
HVC & 4.28 & 3.98 & 1.34 & 3.11 & 7& 5.0(16) & (1.0-3.0)(4) & 400 & 0.8(-4) &  7.1(-20) \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\tablefoot{The CO fluxes in the HVC and
LVC are integrated in the velocity intervals [--30; --7.25] and [--7.25; +11.0], respectively. The \water\ fluxes are derived from a multiple Gaussian fit to the line profile. Intensities are expressed in units of antenna temperature ($T_{\rm A}$) $\K\kms$. \tablefoottext{1}{From CSO observations smoothed down to the resolution of the HIFI observations;} \tablefoottext{2}{determined from LVG analysis of the CO emission;} \tablefoottext{3}{from comparison of LVG-derived N($\rm o-\water$) with N(CO), assuming a water OPR of~3 and an abundance $\rm [CO]/[$\htwo$] = 10^{-4}$.}}
\vspace*{-5mm}
\end{table}