“highly significant”

The use of various hook sizes exhibited highly significant differences in the catch quantities of the target fish group, the nemipterids ( p < 0.001, Table 1 ).

Data are shown in mean ± SD (n = 4) and comparisons to the control (i.e., expression levels of non-stimulated cells) are marked as *** very highly significant (P<0.001), ** highly significant (P<0.01), or * significant (P<0.05).

The smooth term of the GAM was highly significant ( P < 0.001).

The incubation of all BODIPY-labeled AMs with LUVs showed a highly significant increment of r ( p < 0.001, unpaired, two-tailed Student’s t -test, Figure 2 A, Table 1 ), suggesting a lower rotational freedom of the probe in the presence of LUVs.

For the HALF‐MIS group, the difference for HDRS‐17 from start to end was 5.55 (highly significant with p = .001) and for the control group the difference was 1.60 (also significant with p = .019).

After doing so the calculated overall increase in systemic ventricular EF/fractional area of change and decrease in the z score of the systemic ventricular end-diastolic dimension still remained highly significant with +11.2 (13.7)% and median −1.3, respectively (p<0.001 for both).

With pollen from plants with S 1 S 3 haplotypes, SI induced strong inhibition of pollen tube length (22.1%, P<0.001 ***, n=300) and addition of as- PrpS 1 -ODNs gave a highly significant recovery of SI-treated tubes (58.3% increase in length compared to SI-treated; P<0.001, ***, n=150), and incompatible pollen responded in a bimodal manner, consistent with only S 1 pollen being affected ( Supplemental Fig 4 ).

Irradiation was also associated with urethral erosion to a highly significant degree (HR, 3.6; CI, 1.92–6.7; P<0.001).

Dogs that stayed in the shelter for less than 6 months showed a highly significant reduction in neutrophil TLR4 expression after 3 h ( p < 0.001) and a further decrease after 15 h, although no differences were observed between LPS stimulated groups ( Figure 2 A,B).

The between-group difference was highly significant ( p < 0.001).

The results of the factor detector analysis are shown in Figure 6 , and all influencing factors were highly significant ( p < 0.001).

Notably, 5 module–trait relationships (blue-G24, purple-W18, green-W24, red-G12 and magenta-G18) were highly significant ( r > 0.8, p < 10 −3 ; Figure 4 B).

4 F) showed that 15 key genes exhibited highly significant differences between subtype A (Cluster1) and subtype B (Cluster2) ( p < 0.001), namely CHEK1 , BRCA1 , CLSPN , CCNB1 , CCNA2 , TRAP1 , RAN , UCHL1 , LMNB1 , UBE2N , PSMA5 , FLNA , KDM1B , NPM1 , and NUMA1 .

It was statistically highly significant, with a P - value of <0.001.

The absence of shadowing and spiculation remained highly significant predictors of pCR on univariate analysis of the HER-2 positive group, in addition to small ultrasound size (AUC = 0.713, p < 0.001) (Fig. 2) and absence of microcalcification (29 of 74; 39% vs. 17 of 80; 21% p < 0.02) (Table 2 ).

Notably, we found at 300 min a progressive and highly significant increase of FGF-21 in the remaining 15 participants, who had an isolated lipid infusion over a total of 300 min ( P < 0.001; data not shown).

Regarding “overall sensory evaluation,” the test results revealed a highly significant difference (t = −4.27, p < 0.001), demonstrating that participants’ overall acceptance of the samples in Group B was significantly higher than that of Group A1.

The difference in daily change between the Control group and the ST Group is highly significant (p < 0.001).

Difference from control was considered significant as P < 0.05, very significant as P < 0.01, and highly significant as P < 0.001.

At low VPD, a significant correlation between vein and stomata in both G and R plants (R 2 = 0.96, and 0.88, p < 0.001) was found, which was based on lower values of both parameters compared to high VPD where the relation was highly significant too (R 2 = 0.87 and 0.93, p < 0.001) ( Figure 3 ). 2.4.

Post hoc t -tests (corrected for unequal variances when necessary) revealed that the expected effect of larger BID-Indices in the AN compared to the HC group was highly significant in all parts of the body—arm: t (84) = 4.24, p < .001; thigh: t (53.32) = 7.10, p < .001; and waist: t (58.01) = 4.69, p < .001 (cf.

The Chi-square test was highly significant ( p < 0.001).

Data were considered to be significant if p < 0.05 and highly significant with p < 0.001.

When shear bond strength of Group 1B and 3B was compared; statistically highly significant difference ( P < 0.001) was found [ Table 3 ].

Comparison of DEGs showed that there is highly significant overlap ( n = 1006) between DEGs of Δ Mosas3 ( n = 1810) and Δ Mortt109 ( n = 1641), confirming our observation (hypergeometric test, P < 0.001) (Fig.