“extremely significant”

Difference was considered statistically significant with a value of p<0.05, and extremely significant with a value of p<0.01.

In all figures, line charts, and histograms, “ * ” and “ ** ” indicate significant differences ( P <0.05) and extremely significant differences ( P <0.01) compared with another set of data.

Notably, there is an extremely significant linear relationship between the accumulation of N and K in grains and yield ( P <0.01) ( Figures 7A–H ); simultaneously, there is also an extremely significant linear relationship between K accumulation in stems and leaf sheaths and yield ( P <0.01) ( Figures 7A–H ). 4 Discussion 4.1 Respon

The increase rates for herb and shrub species were 6.77 and 1.76 times higher, respectively, than that for tree species, and the difference between the rates for herbs and shrubs was extremely significant ( P < 0.01).

As shown in Figure 5 , an extremely significant increase in MDA was observed in PC12 cells exposed to 90 μ M H 2 O 2 for 2 hours ( P < 0.01), compared to the normal cells.

The result revealed that genotypes (G–T, C–T, A–G, C–T, and G–T) of five SNPs, including rs325760894, rs81382100, rs320502793, SSC14:42805887, and rs705385434, presented extremely significant associated ( p < 0.01) with corresponding traits.

Regarding the significance of interspecific associations: if < 3.841, the association is not significant ( P > 0.05); if 3.841 < < 6.635, the association is significant (0.01 < P < 0.05); if >6.635, the association is extremely significant ( P < 0.01).

After the challenge, the grades of the inflammatory reaction were recorded each week, and there were extremely significant differences between the six test groups and three control groups from 2 wpi until the end of the experiment at 4 wpi ( p < 0.01; Table 1 ).

A significant level of P < 0.05 and extremely significant level of P < 0.01 were used to find significant difference between treatments through the LSD test.

As shown in Table 1 , the model was extremely significant ( p < 0.01) but not significant ( p > 0.05) for the lack of fit, which implied that the regression equation was well fitted.

A Pearson correlation analysis shows that at the scale of 150 m × 150 m, the CRE has extremely significant and positive correlations with slope and elevation ( p < 0.01), and the correlation coefficients are 0.893 and 0.991, respectively.

Statistically significant difference was designated at p < 0.05 and extremely significant at p < 0.01.

** Represented an extremely significant difference ( p < 0.01) 3.

TUE, TDW, IP, IPAR, and RUE of Different Ratoon Rice Varieties The treatment and variety, as well as their interactions, had an extremely significant effect on TDW in the ratoon season and the annual period ( Table 2 and Table 3 , p < 0.01).

In all analyses, differences were considered statistically significant when p < 0.05 and extremely significant when p < 0.01.

Further analysis of these highly expressed miRNAs revealed that three of them (miR-497, miR-146a, and miR-193b) had extremely significant expression with downregulation ( P < 0.01).

As more interviewees chose relaxation and assess to nature in parks, taking these as the focus of the analysis, there was an extremely significant ( p < 0.01) positive correlation between the relaxation behaviors of park users with waterscape ( p = 0.002) and greenery landscapes ( p = 0.001) of the urban parks.

The significance level was set at p < 0.05, with extremely significant results defined as p < 0.01.

In RStudio, the t -test was used to check whether there was a significant difference (significant: p < 0.05; extremely significant: p < 0.01) [ 29 ].

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

The difference between FMHXK-E1 and starch content is extremely significant (P≤0.01), FMGBSS-I8 and starch content are significantly different (P≤0.05).

As shown in Figure 3 A,B, compared with the control group, the expression of ovarian FSHR in the Mel group was significantly increased ( p < 0.05), extremely significant increase in FSH group and FSH+Mel group ( p < 0.01) ( Figure 3 A,B).

The experimental results showed that the linear coefficient of the water content ( X 1 ) and extraction temperature ( X 3 ) were extremely significant ( p < 0.01), whereas the extraction time ( X 4 ) was considerable ( p < 0.05).

An asterisk represented a significant difference ( ∗p < 0.05), and two asterisks represent extremely significant differences ( ∗∗p < 0.01) in the figures.

Differences were considered significant at p < 0.05 and extremely significant at p < 0.01.