\begin{table}%t1
\caption{Comparing the GQ Lup companion to 2M0535 A and B.}\label{tab1}
%\centerline
{\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\hline\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Parameter & \object{GQ Lup b}/B$^a$  & 2M0535 A  & 2M0535 B \\
\hline
$T_{\rm eff}$ [K] & $2650 \pm 100$    & $2650 \pm 100$$^b$ & $2790 \pm 105$$^b$ \\
$\log~(L_{\rm bol}/L_{\odot})$ & $-2.25 \pm 0.24$  & $-1.70 \pm 0.11$   & $-1.74 \pm 0.11$   \\
Age [Myr] & 0--2& 0--3& 0--3\\
Radius [$R_{\odot}$] & $\rm 0.36^{+0.15}_{-0.11}$ & $0.669 \pm 0.034$  & $0.511 \pm 0.026$\\ 
Mass [$M_{\odot}$] & $\rm 0.025^{+0.120}_{-0.021}$$^c$ & $0.054 \pm 0.005$  & $0.034 \pm 0.003$  \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\medskip
Remarks: $^a$ GQ Lup b, if planet or planet candidate; GQ Lup B, if brown dwarf or star. $^b$ $\pm 300$~K systematic uncertainty  \cite{stassun}. $^c$ Regarding the upper limit: our companion is fainter and smaller than both 2M0535~A and B, hence lower in mass than the components of 2M0535.
\end{table}