“highly significant”

Equation ( 1 ) was highly significant when WMH was used instead of QRI ( F = 139.8, p < 10 −16 ), however, SMI was not a significant predictor ( t = 1.9, p = .06).

ChIP-seq showed there was a highly significant correlation ( p values < 10 −16 ) between ER binding fold changes induced by the addition of elacestrant or fulvestrant in the three cell lines tested (Pearson correlations with p values <10 −16 ; 0.78 MCF7, 0.47 MCF7-LTED wt and 0.60 MCF7-LTED Y537C ) especially in regions where there was increased ER binding after treatment versus E2 (Fig. 4A ).

After removal of disconnected nodes, the refined network consisted of 267 nodes and 1154 edges, with an average degree of 8.64 and a highly significant PPI enrichment ( P < 1.0e-16).

For statistical evaluation, we computed the mean Spearman correlation ( ρ ) between predicted and measured gene expression profiles on held-out genes for each tumor type and obtained mean ρ = 0.384 ± 0.016 for PSIONIC, a highly significant result ( P < 10 −16 , one-sided Wilcoxon signed-rank test).

The difference in the maximum likelihood (ML) values for the GTR + Γ and JC models was very large (Δln L = 14757.9) and highly significant ( P < 10 −16 ).

Using STRING analyses, we identified a highly significant protein–protein interaction (PPI) enrichment ( P = 10 −16 ) only for the downregulated genes of H2A.Z.1‐depleted cells.

There is a highly significant correlation between F ST and A ancestry difference between the lowland and highland samples (Spearman's ρ = 0.26, P < 10 −16 ).

Although it displays limited power, the PRS predictor is highly significant ( P < 1.0 × 10 −16 ), and an analysis of variance (ANOVA) between the full PRS model against the null model using covariates only is significant ( P = 1.9 × 10 −12 ), confirming the additional classification accuracy conferred by the PRS predictor.

The correlation between the distance of GO groups in the 0.001 cutoff co-evolution network (that is, their evolutionary distance) and their distance in the corresponding GO ontology network (that is, their functional distance) is highly significant: 0.38 for cellular component, 0.16 for biological process and 0.43 for molecular function (all three with P -values <10 -16 ; a similar trend is observed using the 0.01 cutoff network).

There were highly significant differences in flowering ( F 3, 379.07 = 473.2, P < 1 × 10 −16 ) and green-up ( F 3,416.03 = 110.5, P < 1 × 10 −16 ) among the grandparents.

They were not identical to the ones identified in each disease individually, but showed a highly significant overlap in both cases ( p < 1E−16, χ 2 -test).

The constructed PPIN comprised 44 molecular nodes interconnected by 296 edges, demonstrating highly significant interaction enrichment ( p = 1.0e-16).

All were highly significant ( p < 10 –16 for all chromosomes after Bonferroni correction), with over 96% of the variation in the F5 position being explained by the F2 position for every chromosome tested ( Figure 2 ).

Furthermore, we validated rhythmicity using two alternative detection methods [RAIN (Thaben & Westermark, 2014 ) and ARSER (Yang & Su, 2010 )], which showed a highly significant overlap between the groups ( Appendix Fig S1G ; two‐sided Fisher's exact test, P < 10 −16 for every pairwise comparison).

Consistent with this structure, the STRING PPI enrichment analysis was highly significant (p < 1 × 10 −16 ), supporting the conclusion that these proteins form a biologically coherent interaction network rather than a random assembly ( Figure 9 ).

Overall, a test of independence between the risk score tertiles and the potentially AAMR CNV count classes shows a highly significant association ( P < 1 × 10 −16 ) for both Fisher's exact test and a χ 2 test.

The enrichment was highly significant (PPI enrichment p < 1.0e− 16 ), demonstrating that the observed interactions were unlikely to occur by chance.

Starting with the GO gene sets, we found a highly significant enrichment in genes related to the innate immune response particularly (p = 1.×10 −16 , FDR = 1.36 × 10 −12 ).

The perfect association of the haplotype was highly significant (p<10 −16 ).

As illustrated in Figure 3 , there was a highly significant correlation between the genetic and transcriptome covariances for this set of genes ( r = 0.035, P = 1.0 × 10 −16 ; Figure 3 ).

Across all 10‐kb windows in the genome, there was a weak but highly significant correlation in the distribution of Tajima's D values in the two clusters (Figure 4 b; Spearman's ρ = 0.25; p < 10 −16 ).

When we compared RtAI and the number of HGT events of each COG (again controlling for the fact that some genes appear in fewer organisms; see ‘Materials and Methods’ section) we, once more obtained a highly significant correlation ( r = −0.4125 and P < 10 −16 , pe < 0.001; n = 917).

Protein–protein interaction (PPI) analysis revealed a highly significant network connectivity among these proteins ( p < 1.0 × 10 −16 ).

Statistical analysis (MANOVA) of the original data obtained from the cell populations indicated a highly significant difference between them (p<10 −16 ) suggesting that the nuclear SIRT1 pattern reflects structural differences in the nuclei between the cell populations.

Moreover, pairwise Levene’s tests for equality of variances between ancestry tracts were all highly significant ( p < 1 × 10 −16 ).