“highly significant”

Sensitivity analysis with mechanobiological growth predictions The baseline linear regression model, which did not include multi-scale predictions for AVA development, was highly significant ( p < 0.01) and showed a moderate mean coefficient of determination ( R 2 = 0.46) across the imputations.

Additionally, all significant parameters showed a linear contrasting trend, wherein the trends for WBCs and thrombocytes were significant ( p < 0.05), while those for monocytes and lymphocytes were highly significant ( p < 0.01). 3.4.

The model for PC2 showed a higher amount of both explanatory and predictive power after cross-validation for a highly significant model ( p < 0.010, Table 2 ).

The interaction of different lines and water status has a highly significant effect on CC, LA, PH, NNMS, BN, RWCL, and BIOMASS ( p < 0.01), a significant effect on SWPP ( p < 0.05), and no significant effect on the trait RECL. 2.2.

One-way ANOVA was followed by LSD multiple comparisons and the Wilcoxon test when nonparametric tests were necessary ( p < 0.05 was considered significant, and p < 0.01 was considered highly significant).

This represented a highly significant reduction relative to the Model group ( p < 0.01) and a statistically significant improvement over treatment with unformulated CP-L ( p < 0.05). 3.12.

Cotinine concentrations clearly distinguished the study groups with highly significant differences (p<0.01).

LDH and AST showed a highly significant positive correlation with increasing concentrations of ammonia (linear effect P < 0.01).

Highly significant positive correlation among the LLS disease ratings was found ranging from 0.48 to 0.90 ( p < 0.01).

The results showed that, within short‐term enclosure mode, the contribution degrees of sunshine duration, wind speed, daily maximum temperature, and annual precipitation to the diversity of the dominant locusts and grasshoppers in the different grassland types were > 10% and highly significant ( p < 0.01).

Fixed Effects Analysis According to the least squares analysis, three non-random factors, including the year of birth, season of birth, and non-random factors, had highly significant effects ( p < 0.01) on all weight traits and therefore needed to be used as fixed effects in the genetic parameter estimation model for subsequent genetic analyses ( Table 2 ). 3.2.

Statistical analysis of values shown in Fig 4(A) confirm a highly significant difference ( p < 0.01) in theophylline levels detected after 5, 30 and 60 min at all concentrations, with the exception of the 15 μg/mL against 20 μg/mL Franz cell receptor compartment.

Indeed, the study of the reciprocal correlations (Table 7 ) shows a widespread presence of uniformly positive and highly significant relationships ( p < 0.01).

The P -values obtained from the statistical test of significance were generally significant at P < 0.05 , and highly significant at P < 0.01 .

There were highly significant differences in all cases ( p < 0.01).

P value was considered significant if P < 0.05 and highly significant if P < 0.01.

The effect was statistically highly significant (P < 0.01 in both cases; t test); although in the latter group the mean light response amplitude was somewhat smaller than in cells not subjected to electroporation, the difference turned out not to be statistically significant (P = 0.18).

V, N, and T had significant effects on both fresh and dry weight (P<0.01), while the interaction effects of two or three of them reached highly significant levels on fresh weight (P<0.01), but the interaction of the three factors did not have significant effects on dry weight.

Proteobacteria showed a highly significant positive correlation ( p < 0.01) with AP.

A highly significant difference in the prevalence of E. bieneusi was observed across different urban areas ( p < 0.01), with Longyan city exhibiting the highest infection rate (24.62%, 16/65), Zhangzhou and Xiamen the lowest (0.00%).

Evaluation of scar by the clinician using Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale The difference of SBSES score between 15 th day to 6 months was highly significant ( P < 0.01) for Group 1.

As shown in Fig 5C , the 5-fold difference in the numbers of IFN-γ-producing CD4 + T cells between parental B6 and I/St strains was reduced to a 2-fold difference between B6.I-139 and B6.I-100 mice but remained highly significant ( P < 0.01).

The nitrogen application rate had a highly significant effect on all indicators ( P < 0.01), and variety and growing year had significant effects on most indicators.

Furthermore, there were highly significant variations in the FCR and RFI between the LRFI (4.102 g and –40.888 g, respectively) and HRFI (6.295 g and 31.928 g, respectively) groups ( P < 0.01).

The results of the between-subjects effect test, simple effect analysis ( Tables 2 – 4 ), and pairwise comparative analysis of the tennis players’ reaction time when making a stroke landing prediction showed that the main effect of sport level was highly significant [ F (1,42) = 307.854, p < 0.01, η 2 = 0.880].