“extremely significant”

Firstly, the average BMD in the pelvic fracture group was 0.763 ± 0.026 g/cm2, which was significantly lower than 0.925 ± 0.051 g/cm2 in the normal group, with a statistically extremely significant difference ( P < 0.001), suggesting that low BMD is a main risk factor for pelvic fractures.

There were extremely significant pairs (p<0.001) of co-occurring mutations in the lymph node-positive group: PIK3CA-LRP1B, CASP8-LRP1B, MLL3-BCOR, APC-BRCA1, MLL3-MLL2, and ARID1A-BCOR.

Differences between values were considered statistically significant at p ≤ 0.05 (*), very significant at p<0.01 (**) and extremely significant at p<0.001 (***).

Based on this feature distribution, Figure 5C shows that both current and blue value exhibit extremely significant differences between low‐ and high‐concentration groups ( p < 0.001), validating the rationality of the classification threshold.

One-way ANOVA revealed that crack depth had an extremely significant effect on R -value ( F (10, 429) = 35.5, p < 0.001).

However, it exerted an extremely significant effect on the drip loss rate ( p < 0.001).

Boosting with VLPs resulted in increased antibody titers, with final antibody titers reaching extremely significant (p< 0.001) values over the negative control mice.

Statistics GraphPad (version 5) was used to calculate unpaired and paired p values: ***, extremely significant, p < 0.001; **, very significant, p = 0.001-0.01; *, significant, p = 0.01-0.05; and ns , p > 0.05.

Among these, neutrophil_abs demonstrated extremely significant differences ( P < .001) between the groups.

We concluded that there is an extremely significant difference between the groups ( p <0.001, X 2 =52.26).

According to the result, the d S values showed an extremely significant correlation with the d N values ( R 2 = 0.8081, p < .001) (File S2 : Figure S3 ).

Differences were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05, very significant at p < 0.01, and extremely significant at p < 0.001.

The Model term is extremely significant ( p < 0.001), and the Lack of Fit term is not significant ( p > 0.05), indicating that the model equation is suitable for estimating the TPC extraction yield from T. sebifera leaves.

Level of significance adopted for all tests was p < 0.05 (significant p < 0.05, very significant p < 0.03, extremely significant p < 0.001). 3.

Level of significance are indicated by the number of symbols, *, significant, p < 0.05, **, very significant, p < 0.01, ***, extremely significant, p < 0.001.

Four volatile compounds, including 4-(2,4,4-Trimethyl-cyclohexa-1,5-dienyl)-but-3-en-2-one, alpha -ionone, 2-pentadecanone and 5-ethyl-2,2,3-trimethyl-heptane, exhibited extremely significant ( p < 0.001) positive correlations with stale odor score but negative correlations with aroma sensory score.

There were extremely significant differences among various age groups in term of aggression and NSSI ( P <0.001).

The best effective group was a combination of curcumin 50 mg/kg with piperine 20 mg/kg which showed extremely significant ( P < 0.001) decrease and increase in ECG and serum biomarker level, respectively, and moderate significant ( P < 0.01) decrease in lipid profile, antioxidant levels, and histopathological score, compared to curcumin alone-treated group.

p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant, very significant if 0.001 < p < 0.01 and extremely significant if p < 0.001.

From Figure 8 , it can be concluded that in April 2022, the number of female cones had a significant negative correlation with the K content in November 2021 ( p < 0.05, r = −0.46), a very significant negative correlation with the N content in July 2022 ( p < 0.01, r = −0.51), a significant negative correlation with the K content in July 2022 ( p < 0.05, r = −0.40), a significant positive correlation with the C:N ratio in July 2022 ( p < 0.05, r = 0.38), and an extremely significant negative correlation with the K content in November 2022 ( p < 0.001, r = −0.62).

Bartlett's sphericity test for the 16 items revealed a value of χ2 = 7381.8, deemed extremely significant (P < 0.001) and rejecting the null hypothesis of no relationship between items.

The reduction was extremely significant ( | t | = 8.144 , P = 0.001 , paired t-test) by 29.00 ± 23.91 times on average.

To retrospectively validate this sample size, we note that the key behavioral outcomes (e.g., Novel object recognition, Barnes maze, and Three‐chamber social test) yielded extremely significant differences ( p < 0.001) with very large effect sizes (Cohen's d > 1.7), confirming the adequacy of our experimental design to detect robust effects.

Significance was indicated as p < 0.05, very significant as p < 0.01, and extremely significant as p < 0.001.

A P value of <0.05 was marked as *; a P value of <0.01, which means extremely significant difference, was marked as **; a P value of <0.001, which means extremely significant difference, was marked as ***; and ns means non-significance.