\begin{table}%t3
\caption{\label{tab:cosmo}Best-fit results and 1$\sigma$ ($\Delta \chi^2 =1$) errors of the cosmological parameters constrained in our analysis under different assumptions.}
%\centerline
 {\small 
\begin{tabular}{lcccccl}
\hline\hline
 & $\Omega_{\rm m}$ & $\Omega_{\Lambda}$ & & $\Omega_{\rm m}$ & $-w$ & Comments \\ 
\hline
 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$w=-1$} & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\Omega_{\rm k}=0$} & \\
REF & $0.35^{\rm +0.03}_{-0.04}$ & $0.59^{\rm +0.44}_{-0.56}$ & & $0.32^{\rm +0.04}_{-0.05}$ & $1.10^{\rm +0.60}_{-0.45}$ & reference case (Sects.~5.1 and~5.2) \\
$T=T_0$ & $0.40^{\rm +0.03}_{-0.02}$ & $0.01^{\rm +0.46}_{-0.01}$ & & $0.29^{\rm +0.08}_{-0.05}$ & $1.90^{\rm +2.50}_{-1.10}$ & isothermal ICM (Sect.~3) \\
$b=b_z$ & $0.36^{\rm +0.05}_{-0.04}$ & $0.65^{\rm +0.48}_{-0.50}$ & & $0.34^{\rm +0.04}_{-0.05}$ & $1.20^{\rm +0.65}_{-0.45}$ & depletion parameter dependent on $z$ (Sect.~4.2) \\
$f_{\rm ICL},0.2$ & $0.34^{\rm +0.03}_{-0.04}$ & $0.59^{\rm +0.44}_{-0.56}$ & & $0.31^{\rm +0.04}_{-0.04}$ & $1.05^{\rm +0.60}_{-0.40}$ & adding 20\% to $f_{\rm cold}$ (Sect.~4.1) \\
$f_{\rm star, W}$ & $0.32^{\rm +0.03}_{-0.03}$ & $0.49^{\rm +0.42}_{-0.48}$ & & $0.30^{\rm +0.03}_{-0.04}$ & $0.95^{\rm +0.50}_{-0.35}$ & $f_{\rm star}$ from White et~al. (1993; Sect.~4.1) \\
$f_{\rm star, L}$ & $0.34^{\rm +0.02}_{-0.02}$ & $0.01^{\rm +0.34}_{-0.01}$ & & $0.35^{\rm +0.04}_{-0.04}$ & $0.35^{\rm +0.55}_{-0.35}$ & $f_{\rm star}$ from Lin et~al. (2003; Sect.~4.1) \\
$z>0.3$ & $0.36^{\rm +0.04}_{-0.08}$ & $0.19^{\rm +1.12}_{-0.18}$ & & $0.26^{\rm +0.10}_{-0.09}$ & $1.35^{\rm +1.25}_{-0.75}$ & only high-$z$ objects \\
$T>8$ keV & $0.34^{\rm +0.03}_{-0.05}$ & $0.07^{\rm +0.74}_{-0.06}$ & & $0.31^{\rm +0.08}_{-0.09}$ & $0.75^{\rm +0.85}_{-0.60}$ & only hot objects \\
$\epsilon_f<0.5$ & $0.34^{\rm +0.02}_{-0.03}$ & $0.01^{\rm +0.64}_{-0.01}$ & & $0.33^{\rm +0.04}_{-0.04}$ & $0.70^{\rm +0.45}_{-0.45}$ & only measurements with lower uncertainty \\
cen$_0$ & $0.29^{\rm +0.08}_{-0.05}$ & $1.35^{\rm +0.20}_{-0.52}$ & & $0.24^{\rm +0.08}_{-0.05}$ & $2.00^{\rm +2.45}_{-1.15}$ & more relaxed objects (Sect.~5.4) \\
cen$_1$ & $0.32^{\rm +0.04}_{-0.04}$ & $0.89^{\rm +0.36}_{-0.64}$ & & $0.31^{\rm +0.05}_{-0.05}$ & $1.10^{\rm +0.70}_{-0.50}$ & extended ``cen$_0$'' sample (Sect.~5.4) \\
$H_0=62$ & $0.37^{\rm +0.04}_{-0.04}$ & $0.63^{\rm +0.46}_{-0.48}$ & & $0.35^{\rm +0.04}_{-0.05}$ & $1.15^{\rm +0.65}_{-0.40}$ & $H_0$ from Sandage et~al. (2006) \\
WMAP5 & $0.32^{\rm +0.03}_{-0.02}$ & $1.01^{\rm +0.20}_{-0.28}$ & & $0.33^{\rm +0.02}_{-0.02}$ & $1.25^{\rm +0.35}_{-0.25}$ & $H_0$ and $\Omega_{\rm b}$ from Komatsu et~al. (2008) \\
\hline 
\end{tabular}}
\medskip
 The quoted constraints are obtained for each parameter after marginalization.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:oml_syst}, the same constraints are plotted and the number of clusters in the sample and the total $\chi^2$ are indicated. The single samples are discussed in Sects.~\ref{sect:oml},~\ref{sect:ww}~and \ref{sect:syst}.
\end{table}