“highly significant”

Differences were recognized as significant when p < 0.05 and highly significant when p < 0.01.

The group difference was highly significant in the forward task ( p < 0.01) and significant in the backward task ( p = 0.04 < 0.05).

For urban residents ( N = 1,063), LGC is a highly significant predictor of WTP ( b = 0.132, p < 0.01), while CGC is not significant ( b = 0.033, p = 0.377).

Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05 (*), and highly significant difference as p < 0.01 (**).

The levels of significance were classified as statistically significant ( p < 0.05), highly significant ( p < 0.01), or very highly significant ( p < 0.001). 2.5.

The heterogeneity was substantial ( I 2 = 84.9%), with a highly significant test for heterogeneity ( p < 0.01), indicating considerable variability in the effect sizes across the different studies and elucidating the importance of continuing to perform clinical trials that target CKD and ESKD patients, under similar circumstances.

Tilapia bone powder 1% treated water reveals highly significant ( p < 0.01) increases in dissolved oxygen and declines in physicochemical and microbial parameters compared with tap water.

Analysis of variance showed a highly significant (p ≤ 0.01) difference among all the reproductive stages for all the parameters studied (Tables 1 and 2 ).

This, underlining a possible spill from the endocytic apparatus, was more evident in cells treated with ox-nPS in which acidic organelles were also less developed than the control cells (Δ% −5.1), and the differences compared to 3 h were highly significant ( p < 0.01).

Differences were statistically significant at P ≤ 0.05 and highly significant at P ≤ 0.01.

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

The mean difference between the weights of the placentae corresponding to the heaviest fetus and the weights of the placentae corresponding to the lightest fetus was +1.37 q- 0.128 gm., a highly significant value (t = 10.7, P < 0.01).

Table 5 showed that the quadratic model was highly significant ( p <0.01).

Differences were considered significant when P <0.05 (*) or highly significant when P <0.01( ⁎⁎ ).

Notably, cysteine and glycine displayed highly significant positive correlations with IL-6 ( p ≤ 0.01).

Notably, MDH2 showed highly significant differences between Altay and the other four breeds (Merino sheep, Small-tailed Han sheep, Tibetan sheep, and Wadi sheep) ( p < 0.01 or p < 0.001).

As stated above, female and male progenitors had a highly significant (P < 0.01) effect on all response variables analyzed ( Table 6 ).

The following criteria were used to define statistical significance: differences were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05 (*) and highly significant at p < 0.01 (**), with p > 0.05 regarded as not significant. 3.

Statistical differences were interpreted as significant at p < 0.05 (*), highly significant at p < 0.01 (**), and not significant at p > 0.05 (ns). 3.

For intestinal fluid at odorant pH 8.2, differences between the slopes of control and high CO 2 fish were highly significant ( F 44 = 8.15, p < 0.01); it was therefore not possible to compare the intercepts ( Figure 5C ).

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).

Statistically significant changes were classed as significant [ ∗ ] where p < 0.05, highly significant [ ∗∗ ] where p < 0.01.

The content of Linoleic acid (18:2,cis) in the breast muscle tissues of the CON and 0.9% FCE groups was highly significant ( P < 0.01) lower compared with that of the 0.6% FCE group.

The correlation between index and last referral was moderate ( r = 0.51) and highly significant ( p < 0.01).

In contrast to glycolysis, for these parameters, there was a negative association with E6*I expression as well which was highly significant ( p < 0.01), indicating that the inhibition of mitochondrial respiration was determined by both the levels of RT_A and the levels of E6*I .