Excerpts

A highly significant cultivar x treatment effect (P < 0.001) was noted for 1000 grain weight in 2014, with Pusa 1121 recording 17% and NL-44 recording only 3.2% lower 1000 grain weight under e[CO 2 ] + HT compared to e[CO 2 ](Table 2 ).

The difference in the proportion of females choosing the pesticide-free side between the conditioned and unconditioned females groups was highly significant for all insecticides tested (Likelihood Odds ratio: P < 0.001 in all cases, Table 2 ).

The results of the regression indicated that the model explained 19.1% of the variance ( R 2 = 0.19) and the model was a moderately significant predictor of sensorimotor variability ( F (3,434) = 34.24, p < 0.001; multiple correlation coefficient R = 0.44).

At 3 months, the correlation coefficients became strong, with Menadione showing r = 0.468 and XELOX r = 0.519, both highly significant ( p < 0.001).

Examining technicians' performance on the same cross-combinations simultaneously, we found highly significant differences among technicians in making successful pollination ( p < 0.001).

The PCA of shape variability from PC1 score showed that the forewing shape differences were highly significant among the 39 populations (F 2, 39 = 146.562, P < 0.001); however, the shape variability from PC2 score (F 2, 39 = 0.151, P > 0.05) and PC3 score (F 2, 39 = 0.010, P > 0.05) were not significant.

The largest magnitude of difference was between NFTD and NLSD, with NFTD being 10.5 dB lower ( p < 0.001, highly significant).

For ten of these genes ( acana , bicc2 , cldn24 , c och , csf1r1 , fzd9b , kcnk3a , melA , pax7a , and scarb1 ), highly significant differential expression was detected in red spots compared with black spots and background colour regions (p < 0.001).

Hydropower exhibited a highly significant negative correlation with energy efficiency (-0.632, p < 0.001), with a regression coefficient of -7.642 × 10−4 ( p < 0.001).

Table 3 demonstrates a highly significant main effect of time ( F = 1836.90, P < 0.001) and a significant interaction between time and group ( F = 91.06, P < 0.001) on the thickness of the limbal-conjunctival autograft.

From these listed genes, we selected the top 27 genes, which have a highly significant difference (p < 0.001) as shown in Table 1 .

The horizontal ROM is highly significant across all groups ( P < 0.001, η 2 = 0.182).

Regression analysis revealed a highly significant correlation between δ 13 C in modern Sphagnum and the present WT depth ( R 2 = 0.67, p < 0.001, Fig.

Among the factors, feed rate (A) is highly significant for forming time (F = 55.50, p = 0.001) and also influences WA, TR, Ra, FT, and SB ( p ≤ 0.04), though it is not significant for Pc ( p = 0.10).

A repeated-measures ANOVA with Singer (S1 and S2) and AOI (eyes, mouth) revealed a highly significant effect of Singer, F(1, 64) = 17.2, p < 0.001, as well as a marginal effect of AOI, F(1, 64) = 3.97, p = 0.05, but no significant interaction between the two, F(1, 64) = 1.69, p = 0.20.

A one-way ANOVA revealed a highly significant main effect of anatomical site on intercalated duct diameter (F(5, 54) = 409.4, p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.974).

Herbicide treatment had a highly significant effect on all yield parameters (p < 0.001), whereas the main effect of year was not significant.

7A ) but was highly significant when pH 3 gastric samples were derived from patients “on PPI” therapy (p = 0.001) (Fig. 7B ).

The difference between the mean correlations for the two categories was also highly significant (t(14) = −5.40, p < 0.001).

We found the following: (a) The effect of Virus was highly significant (P < 0.001, Greenhouse–Geisser test), with JCV and BLV having lower average PBA scores (Fig. 2 ); (b) The effect of HLA Class was also highly significant (P < 0.001, F-test), with HLA-I having 2.5 × higher scores than HLA-II (Fig. 3 A); and (c) the Virus x Class interaction term was also highly significant (P < 0.001, Greenhouse–Geisser test) (Fig. 3 B).

Among the 13 distinct features selected, four features (LM-W LHL -G-MaxProb-T2, TM-W LHL -G-MaxProb-T2, LM-W HLL - G-MaxProb-T2, E-W HLH -H-Max-T2) were statistically extremely significant (p-value < 0.001), seven features (E-W HHL -H-Max_T2, T-H-Min-T2, TM-W HLH -H-Min-T1, E-MedianLBP-T1, T-MedianLBP-T1, E-W HLH -H-MeanAbsDev-T2, TM-GE-Convexity-T1) were statistically highly significant (p-value < 0.01), and two features (TM-W HLH -H-Min-T2, LM-W HLL -H-Range-T2) were statistically significant (p-value < 0.05), between the LC versus LF outcomes.

We found highly significant differences between the groups in age, total bilirubin levels, direct bilirubin levels, G6PD activity, red blood cell counts and hemoglobin concentrations ( p < 0.001).

The regression between cochlea length and body mass is highly significant (ca. 54%, P < 0.001), but the respective scatterplot (Fig. 4 A) allows the observation that this result is mostly driven by rodents, the group with the widest body mass range in the sample.

The difference between means is significant if p < 0.05 (*), very significant if p < 0.01 (**), and extremely significant if p < 0.001 (***).

Although these methods had a lot in common in highly significant MTAs, there was a difference between the methods in terms of significant SNPs at the level of − log 10 ( p ) > 3.