Excerpts

saxicola with differences between the species being highly significant ( Fig. 3 , t-test: t = −22.0, d.f. = 24, P <0.001).

The results showed that the difference is extremely significant (F = 5.925, p<0.001) (see Table 2 ).

The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was 0.71, above the recommended value of 0.60 [ 127 – 129 ], and the Bartlett test of sphericity was highly significant (1852.64, p < 0.001), indicating that PCA is appropriate for this dataset [ 114 – 116 , 118 , 130 ].

For type 13, we found highly significant selection ( P <0.001) in landraces of Indonesia and the Philippines, especially in japonica rice.

Although the median age of cHL patients in the EBV+ group did not differ much from that of the EBV- cHL patient group (31 years, range: 4–74 ys and 27 years, range: 8–74 ys respectively) ( Table 1 ), the 10 years age group distribution between EBV+ and EBV- patients did show a highly significant difference (p<0.001).

The association remained highly significant for both 8-oxodG and 8-oxoGuo, in both linear ( P <0.001 for both markers) and multivariate regression analysis ( P = 0.002 and P <0.001, respectively).

� Answer: We now statistically tested whether the difference in informed decision (yes/no) between respondents that participated in NBS and those who declined NBS with a chi square test and this was highly significant (p<.001).

This result is supported by previously identified highly significant (p<0.001) positive additive (‘bb’) x additive (‘bb’) effects from a joint scaling test using the MRI x SB22 full-sibling family indicating the presence of homozygous loci with an increase in susceptibility [ 19 ].

Statistical significance (p<0.05) is indicated by a single asterisks or double asterisks if highly significant (p<0.001).

In this location the positive correlation between the deposition of bird faeces and soil nitrogen stable isotope ratio ( δ 15 N) was also highly significant ( r s = 0.69, n = 20, p < 0.001), while it was negative for the carbon signature ( δ 13 C; r s = –0.70, n = 20, p < 0.001).

A visibility × delay repeated-measures ANOVA revealed a highly significant main effect for delay (F [2.199, 15.391] = 149.930, p < 0.001, η p 2 = .955), while neither visibility (F [ 1 , 7 ] = .118, p = 0.741, η p 2 = .017) nor interaction (F [2.874, 20.120] = .518, p = 0.667, η p 2 = .069) was significant.

For microsatellites, pairwise comparison of F ST showed highly significant differentiation ( F ST = 0.068, P<0.001).

With additional adjustments for paternal factors in the sub-sample (n = 414), ethnic differences persisted for ponderal index (−0.60 −0.7, −0.43) and were still highly significant (p<0.001) for AC.

When p was < 0.01, events were considered highly significant, p < 0.001 indicated extremely significant events.

Composite case-management performance and testing rates The composite performance, defined as patient tested for malaria and treated with AL if the test result was positive or not treated for malaria if the result was negative, improved significantly by 34.2%; from 15.7% at the baseline to 49.9% at the last follow-up survey (p<0.001) with an increasing trend across all survey rounds (p<0.001) ( Figure 4 ).

Across all candidate models spring temperature was a highly significant predictor (p < 0.001).

In a mixed effect model including time step 1 and time step 4 in one model (see statistical analyses), the interaction term between insecticide treatment×time step was highly significant ( F 1,13 = 20.98, P <0.001), providing evidence that the effect of insecticide treatment was not constant across the sampling dates, with lower aphid abundances in the treated fields at the first survey (first time step), but higher aphid abundances in the treated fields at the last survey.

The heterogeneity test was highly significant, Q W (12) = 38.43, p < .001, indicating that the effect sizes indeed systematically differed from each other.

Gene ontology (GO) analysis for biological process (BP) of the 1,314 DEG genes from above ( S6 Table ) revealed 509 GO BP terms, 170 of which were highly significant (FDR adjusted p-value <1e -3 ; S7 Table ).

A highly significant higher level of sCD200 was found among cases as compared to controls (P<0.001), while a significantly lower level of CD200 R expression on both lymphocytes and monocytes was detectable in cases as compared to controls (P < 0.001 in both instances) Table 1 .

IDI, though not significant, showed a trend of improved classificatory ability compared with Model 1 (NRI [95% CI], 0.74 [0.31, 1.17], P < 0.001; IDI [95% CI], 0.05 [-0.01, 0.12], P = 0.126).

Regression analysis revealed highly significant (P<0.001 in all cases) linear relationships between the frequency of body undulations with tail excursions>90° and metabolic rate ( Fig. 3 ).

This concentration was highly significant and inconsistent with resource-proportional foraging (χ2 = 62.88, df = 3, p < 0.001; S3A Table ).

This analysis shows that BMI, WBC, HDL, TG, vitamin D, and TC are key predictors of the age at onset of T2D, as they have highly significant p-values (p < 0.001).

In women however, even though the DCSI-CC score in the occupational sector “Health sector, social work, teaching and education” was among the lowest, there was a highly significant increase in the odds of having a higher DCSI-CC score in p4 compared to p1 (OR = 1,12, p<0,001) ( Fig 4 ).