“highly significant”

This is a highly significant (p < 2.2 × 10 −16 ) excess (see Materials and Methods), suggesting some concordance in signal at the individual gene level.

Distribution profiles of wtTrop-2 /∆cytoTrop-2 cells indicated a highly significant reduction in aggregates with respect to control cells (χ2 test P-value <2.2e−16).

This difference was highly significant ( χ 2 = 482.2; P < 2.2e -16 ), indicating that ancient gene pairs have been highly dispersed.

This is exemplified by the colocalization of DPDs with regions of higher CpG density ( Figure 6B ) and a robust and highly significant negative correlation between CpG density and PMDs (r = −0.64, P<2.2×10 −16 ).

A comparison of activation strength in both assays revealed an intermediate (Pearson's correlation coefficient of 0.58) but highly significant correlation ( P < 2.2e−16) of activation values ( Figure 1B ).

In this study, we found a highly significant correlation between the letter and pseudo-letter versions of the MEP task ( r = 0.73, p < 2.2 × 10 −16 ; CI = 0.710–0.758; dis-attenuated correlation r = 0.915, with task reliability of 0.80).

The degree of compartmental conservation is highly significant ( P < 2.2e-16), as ~80% of the genome shows consistent compartmental labeling in at least 16 samples and ~40% is invariant in all 21 samples, in contrast to 7% and 0% to be expected by chance, respectively (Supplementary information, Fig.

The richness of species and genera were higher in the historic samples than in the recent samples, but proportions of endemic genera and species were lower in the historic samples ( table 2 ). Highly significant declines were documented both in the numbers of species ( p = 2.20 × 10 −16 ) and genera ( p = 1.13 × 10 −10 ) between the 1940s and the present ( table 1 ).

The difference was highly significant ( P -value < 2.2 × 10 −16 ) with cGD averaging 5.8 for populations belonging to the same SDRN and 22.8 for populations that did not belong to the same SDRN.

Spearman’s correlation of the methylation levels obtained for the fully methylated and unmethylated HBV controls with Nanopolish and Guppy+Medaka indicated a highly significant correlation ( R =0.83, P <2.2 −16 ) ( Fig. 2e ).

The analysis revealed a highly significant enrichment ( p < 2.2 × 10 −16 ) of QTLs within CNVRs.

Based on the comparison of intact to degraded cartilage, the log-fold-changes in RNA expression and the differences in mean promoter region methylation values demonstrated a small but highly significant correlation (Pearson’s r = −0.08, p < 2.2 × 10 −16 , Fig. 2b , Supplementary Table S7 ).

0.00276, Fisher's exact test p-value = 1.34e-05), there is a highly significant excess of sites supporting the species topology (0.00229 vs. 0.00210, Fisher's exact test p-value < 2.2e-16) and deficit of sites in these regions supporting ILS topologies (0.00042 vs. 0.00066, Fisher's exact test p-value < 2.2e-16, Fig 2B and 2C ), which suggests that the observed reduction of ILS is not the result of a lower mutation rate.

The beta estimates for these SNPs showed a highly significant linear correlation ( P < 2.2e−16, Fig. 1g, j ).

For all three species comparisons, a linear regression of %ID and log 2 hybridization ratio showed a strong and highly significant correlation ( D. sechellia : Multiple R 2 = 0.3257, P < 2.2e-16; D. simulans : Multiple R 2 = 0.2920, P < 2.2e-16; D. yakuba : Multiple R 2 = 0.4083, P < 2.2e-16) (Figure 2 ), with the data for D. yakuba showing the strongest correlation.

Consistent with previous reports ( Vetter et al., 2004 ), there were highly significant differences in both impedance magnitude ( Figure 5B : χ 2 = 311.86, p < 2.2 × 10 −16 , df = 8; Kruskal–Wallis test) and phase angle ( Figure 5C : χ 2 = 164.72, p < 2.2 × 10 –16 , df = 8; Kruskal–Wallis test) during the first WPI.

There was a highly significant correlation (Spearman’s rho of 0.81, p < 2.2 × 10 −16 ) of the PBMC expression changes 6 h after HIIT and HBO 2 ( Figure 5 D).

Pearson correlation analysis of these whole‐sample average expression profiles revealed highly significant correlations between replicates (Peach: r = 0.94, p < 2.2e‐16; Nectarine: r = 0.91, p < 2.2e‐16), with LOESS regression confirming the linear relationship (Figure S15A ).

239.3 cm) compared to Sb, and in both cases differences resulted highly significant ( p = 2.2×10 −16 and p = 2.7×10 −15 for MAT and PH, respectively).

Indeed, pit-diggers performed ~ 15x more CNN-predicted scoops versus spits within daily bower ROIs and this pattern was highly significant within each subject (CV: 273 scoops vs. 20 spits, χ 2 = 311.35, p < 2.2 × 10 –16 ; TI subject 1: 339 scoops vs. 16 spits, χ 2 = 127.2, p < 2.2 × 10 –16 ; TI subject 2: 602 scoops vs. 60 spits, χ 2 = 377.28, p < 2.2 × 10 –16 ).

Direct correlation analysis further revealed that IDO1 expression maintained a strong, highly significant positive correlation with CD8+ T cell infiltration (R=0.64, p =2.2×10 -16 ) ( Figure 3 ).

The overall model including all predictors was highly significant for both, the plaque size in the aortic root and BCA (BCA: F(4, 94) = 37.44, p-value < 2.2e-16 r2 = 0.60; heart: F(4, 81) = 65.09, p-value < 2.2e-16, r2 = 0.75).

A highly significant statistical difference (X-squared = 1715.4, df = 180, p -value < 2.2 × 10 −16 ) was found between the frequency combinations of the two haplotype sequences. 3.5.

The ability of DEcode to predict global DE prior ranks was highly significant (P < 2.2e-16) and practically relevant (Spearman's rho = 0.53) ( Extended Data Figure 3a ).

Comparison using a paired t-test for R s from the predictive model and their corresponding permutated variant indicated a highly significant difference between both model types ( p -value < 2.2 × 10 −16 across cases), indicating that these model predictions are extremely unlikely to be due to chance.