“highly significant”

From the first to the third post-treatment years (Post 1 to Post 3), the coefficients exhibit a steady and highly significant upward trend (0.00889, 0.0134, and 0.0170, respectively; all p < 0.01).

Differences were considered statistically significant at P < 0.05 and highly significant at P < 0.01.

The Tables 5 , and 6 indicate highly significant discriminant function ( p < 0.01) with the values of Wilks’ Lambda, i.e. 0.328 and 0.388 for slum and non slum analysis respectively.

Statistically significant difference was set at P < 0.05, and highly significant difference was set at P < 0.01.

Results of correlation analysis in Table 3 , demonstrating there were highly significant ( p < 0.01) positive associations between Cr-Pb (r = 0.946), Ni-Pb (r = 0.932) and Cr-Ni (r = 0.916) in different brands of lotion.

In the KCCQ histogram (right), Group 1 generally has higher quality of life scores, with many patients scoring 65-80, whereas Group 2’s scores are shifted toward lower ranges (50-65); this difference is highly significant (p < 0.01), highlighting poorer perceived health status in Group 2.

In IB 4 -labelled eye-cup sections the mean number of vessel profiles belonging to the superficial plexus was unchanged with respect to control, while highly significant increases over the normal values were shown by vessels of connecting layer and deep plexus (P<0.01).

The correlation of the log2 ratios between the two tissues based on the 81 genes was found to be highly significant (r = 0.51, P < 0.01).

aga and Hayashi (3). bGroup A: apparently healthy infants delivered from mothers not in- gesting PCB-contaminated rice oil during pregnancy; Group B: chil- dren born to mothers who consumed PCB-contaminated rice oil during pregnancy but showing no FPS at birth; Group C: children with FPS. "Highly significant p value differences (p < 0.01). *Significant differences (p < 0.05). between female FPS and female non-FPS infants in Nagaskaki (3) (Table 4).

Analysis of Variance ANOVA revealed highly significant difference (P < 0.01) in young aged labial tissues and significant (P ≤ 0.05) in gingival and not significant (P > 0.05) in inferior surface of tongue and in hard palatal tissues.

The level of significance was set as <0.05, and the data were indicated with the symbol * if significant ( p < 0.05) and with the symbol ** if highly significant ( p < 0.01).

The results ( Table 2 ) showed that both maize variety and drought stress treatment had highly significant effects (p < 0.01) on all germination- and seedling-stage traits.

For all analyses the minimum level of statistical significance was set at P < 0.05 (not significant different means P > 0.05; significant different (*) means P < 0.05; highly significant different (**) means P < 0.01; very highly significant different (***) means P < 0.001).

The results of the analysis of variance on the mean scores of the subjects across each subscale indicate a highly significant main effect of the strategy [ F (5,654) = 7.117, p < 0.01].

The error correction term (ECTt−1) is negative and highly significant (−0.563, p < 0.01), confirming a stable adjustment toward long-run equilibrium.

There was also a highly significant difference in the community structure of samples produced using extracted DNA or RNA ( p < 0.01). 3.3.2.

The interaction between cropping systems and year had a highly significant effect on CF ( P < 0.01).

Conversely, we observed a highly significant association ( p < .01) of PC1 with the neuronal MGP, indicating that the main axis of variation can be explained by cell composition.

Detailed pair-wise LD r 2 values for all the consensus linkage groups are projected as heat-plot triangular matrices in Additional file 6 : Figure S4, together with the polymorphism index content plots along the chromosomes (reported as standardized average PIC values of a three-marker sliding window) and the distributions of markers with highly significant ( P ≤ 0.01) genetic differentiation ( F ST indexes) among the main sub-populations represented in the panel.

Thus statistically significant comparisons were set at p < 0.05 (no correction) and highly significant comparisons at p < 0.01.

In addition, the conditional effect shows that for males the model is highly significant ( effect = 0.86, SE = 0.122, t = 7.07, the confidence interval does not contain zero, p < 0.01), indicating a moderating relationship with IM concerns and social media fatigue.

These performance gains over the strongest single-agent baseline (SKEP) are highly significant ( p < 0.01; Odds Ratio = 3.0–73.0, Cohen’s g ≥ 0.25; McNemar’s test for DDx; Wilcoxon signed-rank test for CN-R).

Similarly, the ANOVA result showed a highly significant variation in the mean concentration of TAF among the examined feed types, with TMR having a significantly ( p < 0.01) higher mean level of TAF (mean = 92.20 ± 8.2 μg/kg; range = ND) compared to MF (mean = 43.80 ± 8.2 μg/kg; range = ND–175.9 μg/kg) and WB (mean = 26.0 ± 8.2 μg/kg; range = ND–245.5 μg/kg).

A bivariate correlation indicated a highly significant ( p ≤ 0.01) positive correlation of antioxidant activity with TP content (R 2 = 0.83–0.96).

However, for carbon stable isotopes, the difference between the EH-GLG and XXL-LS populations reached a highly significant level ( p < 0.01); at the same time, the δ 13 C values of the hairs from the XXL-LS was different from the QL population ( p < 0.05), while the disparity of GLG and QL populations was not evident ( p > 0.05) in carbon isotopes ( Figure 3 a).