“highly significant”

Differences were considered statistically significant at p ≤ 0.05 (5% level) and highly significant p < 0.01 (1% level).

There was a highly significant ( p < 0.01) negative correlation between grass biomass yield and Mg concentration.

The statistical analysis demonstrated that both the type of cheese and the ripening time had a highly significant effect on gene expression ( p < 0.01), as did their interaction.

The LC 50 values of the insecticides of carbamate group had highly significant (P < 0.01) correlation within the group.

One-way ANOVA of the virus accumulation in the control and treatment groups were highly significant, ( P <0.01) for DWV ( F = 11.83, df = 23 P = 0.00234; Cohen’s d = 1.473107, large effect size), and ( P <0.001) for VDV-1 ( F = 17.95, df = 23.

The differences were considered to be statistically significant if p < 0.05, highly significant if p < 0.01, very highly significant if p < 0.001, or not statically significant if p > 0.05.

Differences were considered significant at p<0.05 or highly significant at p<0.01.

Similarly, a highly significant difference was observed at the University education level (p < 0.01), with the clinical attendee group showing greater willingness (91.7%) compared to the University personnel group (67.2%).

The data of the test compounds were analyzed with Dunnett’s multiple comparison test for significant ( p ≤ 0.05) or highly significant ( p ≤ 0.01) differences from the negative control.

Two-tailed tests of significance were considered to be significant at a p < 0.05 and highly significant at p < 0.01.

Table 2 , which reports results of the X 2 -test of statistical significance of differences in the observed FoS values, shows that the observed differences are highly significant ( X 2 = 310.08; p<0.01). 3.2 Regression models Tables 3 – 5 present the estimated models.

In the combined model, stage and hydronephrosis emerged as significant clinical factors ( p = 0.03 and p = 0.01, respectively), while the three radiomics features remained highly significant ( p < 0.01).

BnaA02g30290D and BnaA02g30310D showed significant differences in expression between BC 4 F 2:3 (AA) and BC 4 F 2:3 (aa) at the 6-leaf stage ( p < 0.05), and the difference in BnaA02g30260D was highly significant ( p < 0.01) (Fig. 4 ).

Linear X 1 , X 4 coefficients had highly significant ( p < 0.01) effects on FRAP, while the X 1 2 and X 1 2 had significant effects ( p < 0.05) on FRAP.

Parameters of mature pods According to the ANOVA analysis, the foliar spray treatments and Mg levels were highly significant ( P < 0.01) for the mature pods'parameters (number of green pods per plant, the weight of dry pods, and the weight of green pods per plant) (Table 4 ).

During the gastric phase, two key changes occurred simultaneously: the content of toxic As(III) exhibited a significant decrease from 535.25 ± 117.67 μg/kg to 354.1 ± 58.18 μg/kg ( p < 0.05), while the low-toxicity AsB content demonstrated a highly significant increase ( p < 0.01).

Differences were considered significant if p < 0.05 (*) and highly significant when p < 0.01 (**) or p < 0.001 (***).

Difference between variables was considered as nonsignificant with P value >0.05, significant at P value >0.05, highly significant at P value >0.01, and very highly significant at P value >0.001.

The different processing methods had a highly significant effect on the transverse relaxation time T 2 of duck jerky ( p < 0.01) ( Figure 2A ).

The analysis of differentially expressed genes among two varieties showed that the GmPYLs gene family contained 2, 6, 4, 7, 6 highly significant differentially genes ( p ≤ 0.01) and 1, 1, 2, 3, 0 the significant differentially genes (0.01 < p ≤ 0.05) in the meristem, unifoliate leaves, epicotyl, hypocotyl, and roots.

Differences were considered significant if P <0.05 and highly significant if P <0.01.

Differences were considered statistically significant when p < 0.05, highly significant when p < 0.01, and extremely significant when p < 0.001. 3.

Most of the phenotypic traits were highly significant differences ( p < 0.01) among provenances.

The regression model was highly significant ( P < 0.01), and the lack of fit was not significant ( P > 0.05), indicating that the model was significant and had a good fit.

Non-significant pairwise F ST genetic distances based on 12 Y-STRs were shown between the regions surrounding the Valach country (Moravia-Silesia and Zlin regions, data by Zastera et al) and CZE, but highly significant between the Valach samples and both CZE and Zastera’s data ( P < 0.010; 10000 permutations).