“highly significant”

Correlation analysis results are depicted in Table 3 and showed a negative and highly significant relationship between physical activity positive attitude and physical activity negative attitude ( r =−0.733, p < 0.01), a positive and significant relationship between physical activity positive attitude and family nutrition and physical activity attitude ( r = 0.648, p < 0.01), and a negative and significant relationship between physical activity negative attitude and family nutrition and physical activity attitude ( r =−0.596, p < 0.01).

ANOVA showed highly significant effects ( P < 0.01) of genotypes, environments, and genotype × environment interactions on all traits ( Table 1 ) that were exhibited.

And the interaction effect of varieties and additives had a significant effect on CP of WPC silage ( p < 0.05), had a highly significant effect on WSC ( p < 0.01) but not significant effect on DM, EE and Ash ( p > 0.05).

The obtained results were interpreted as: insignificant – P >0.05; significant – P <0.05; highly significant – P <0.01.

Significant association ( P <0.05) was observed for four distinct SNPs with at least one of the evaluated traits except for spike length, and four of the associations were highly significant ( P <0.01) ( Table 6 ).

Furthermore, highly significant correlations were found between the study variables (p <0.01).

The p -value was interpreted as significant (S) if the P -value < 0.05 and as highly significant (HS) if the P -value < 0.01.

Statistical analysis was conducted using Student’s t-test, and differences were considered statistically significant when P < 0.05 (*) and highly significant when P < 0.01 (**). 3.

* Significant difference ( P < 0.05); ** Highly significant difference ( P < 0.01).

Significance levels were determined as follows: significant (*) for p ≤ 0.05, highly significant (**) for p ≤ 0.01, and extremely significant (***) for p ≤ 0.001.

Values are from the thymidine uptake assay. Table VI Spearman rank correlation coefficients (re) for thymidine and leucine IC,0 data Significance Combination rS Probability of coefficient Thymidine Cisplatin/iproplatin 0.806 P<0.01 Highly significant Cisplatin/carboplatin 0.939 P<0.01 Highly significant Iproplatin/carboplatin 0.867 P<0.01 Highly significant Tetraplatin/cisplatin 0.385 P>0.05 Not significant Tetraplatin/iproplatin 0.476 P>0.05 Not significant Tetraplatin/carboplatin 0.494 P>0.05 Not significant Leucine Cisplatin/ipropla

Highly significant differences ( P < 0.01) were observed for all comparisons except for Group III where it was comparable.

First, although the practice effect is highly significant ( p < 0.01), in practical terms it is rather small (some 40 ms difference in RT and 2% difference in PC).

The statistical significance was measured by employing p < 0.01–0.05 level and results are labeled as ‘a’ representing significant p < 0.05 and ‘b’ representing highly significant p < 0.01, and “c” representing the super significant at p > 0.001. 3 Result and discussion 3.1 Extraction of chlorogenic acid The Chlorogenic (CG) acid was extracted using polar solvents with different degrees of polarity.

In the control group, which received the corn-based diet, there was a highly significant (p<0.01) correlation between the ducks’ high abdominal fat weights and the equally high levels of triglyceride in the serum and in the liver.

Significance of Effects from Analysis of Intervals For the analysis of health treatment cost by interval within lactation, the fixed effects of herd, interval, and the interaction of herd and interval were all highly significant ( p < 0.01) in first parity for each category of health treatment cost as well as TOT.

One-way ANOVA was used to analyze the significance of differences, and a value of p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant; highly significant differences were indicated at p < 0.01.

Among the tested factors, glucose ( x 2 ) and sucrose ( x 3 ) had highly significant effects ( p < 0.01) on both EPS and cell mass, while PYE ( x 1 ) significantly influenced biomass only ( p = 0.0492).

Results Phenotypic variability for fruit morphology and yield Analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed highly significant differences ( P ≤ 0.01) among test genotypes, checks, and checks vs test genotypes, indicating the presence of phenotypic variability for fruit morphology and yield parameters for CAMP ( Table 1 ).

This increase in metaphase cells is statistically highly significant ( P < 0.01 by the Chi squared test).

(For all tables: * = statistically significant difference ( P < 0.05), ** = statistically highly significant difference ( P < 0.01), # = non-significant difference ( P > 0.05).) RESULTS The study received responses from 237 participants.

Across all locations, the effect of the environment was highly significant ( p > 0.01) for all characteristics.

Figure 3 shows that correlations between the 90th percentile estimates of Stoffenmanager and calculated exposure scores using the new model are highly significant for all situations ( r = 0.93, p < 0.01), FRP lamination ( r = 0.67, p < 0.01), and inspection ( r = 0.85, p < 0.01).

The SL parameter was moderately low, associated with RL (0.31 at p ≤ 0.05), while highly significant ( p ≤ 0.01) with VI (0.74 ** ).

Although the Lötschental record detects some of the strongest 20 volcanic SAOD events during the last millennium, a SEA of these events reveals that a highly significant (p < 0.01) cooling in the year of the event and year after the event is not detectable in this record (Fig. 6 d).