“marginally significant”

Although no pairwise differences were detected in combined photosynthetic N allocation (N P , all P > 0.3; Table S2 ), forest invaders in both their away and home ranges showed small but marginally significant increases in N L (23% and 27% compared to 19%; P = 0.0557, 0.0748, respectively; Fig. 4 ).

The induction was lower in the YIDDst transformants than that of WT, yet only at a marginally significant level ( p = 0.0557). 3.

Interestingly, four social consistent OGs, homeobox protein ARX, mitochondrial transcription factor A (TFAM), myoneurin, and LOC102655824 (uncharacterized) , are annotated with the “DNA binding” GO term (GO:0003677), a marginally significant enrichment relative to expectations based upon the number of total OGs annotated with DNA binding (2.7-fold enrichment; P = 5.57e−2, hypergeometric test of overlap) ( Table S14 ).

There were no statistical- ly significant differences between the groups exposed to radon 1600 WLM and tobacco smoke 60 hr or 100 hr compared with rats exposed to radon 1000 WLM only, but there was a marginally significant difference between the group exposed to radon 1600 WLM and tobacco smoke 30 hr combined compared with the group exposed to radon 1600 WLM only (p = 0.0557, Fisher's exact test).

On fast DC responses (gray bars, 5b ), the early modulation was significantly higher ( p = 0.0132), while the late selection was reduced relative to slow (gray bars, 5c ) responses (marginally significant, p = 0.0558).

For BMI, the P value was significant in sample 1 ( P = 4.23×10 -3 ), and marginally significant in sample 2 ( P = 5.58×10 -2 ).

The positive association between traditional gender-role attitudes and experience of physical NCS was not found among boys, but marginally significant (OR = 1.41, p = 0.0558) among girls.

The t ‐test and ANOVA results showed a marginally significant difference in capacitance retention percentage ( t ‐statistic = −1.9, p ‐value = 0.0558) between the NiCo 2 S 4 and NiCo 2 S 4 /graphene composites, suggesting potential differences in cyclic stability.

However, role-specific training was marginally significant (p = 0.0558), suggesting a possible relationship with higher ability.

The interaction was marginally significant (F(3,39) = 2.75, p = .056).

Overall, there was a marginally significant difference found between the reed 41.7 ± 40.06 cm and rush defense distances 18.8 ± 28.64 cm, t = 1.98, df = 33, P = 0.056, though the differences were significant for the aggressive behaviors (see ahead).

Regarding Wingate peak power, the pooled estimate including pre-post data of all IF interventions was marginally significant (k = 3; SMD = 0.758 (95% CI [−0.019, 1.535], p = 0.056; Q = 113.389, p < 0.001; I 2 = 98%). 3.4.2.

A repeated measures analysis of variance showed a marginally significant main effect of time for the health distress items ( F 1,22 =4.080; P =.056; η 2 =0.156; power=0.489), indicating that overall, participants’ scores showed less health distress (ie, discouragement, fear, worry, and frustration) in their last assessment (mean 2.01, SD 0.81) than in their first assessment (mean 2.36, SD 1.24).

For the high-strength group, the linear regression revealed a marginally significant effect of intergroup comparison on the intention to conserve water ( b = 11.779, SE = 6.115, t = 1.93, p = 0.056).

Statistical analyses indicated that wild boar ( p < 0.001), wood mouse ( Apodemus sp.; p < 0.05), Eurasian jay ( Garrulus glandarius ; p < 0.05), common genet ( Genetta genetta ), and stone marten (marginally significant, p = 0.056 and p = 0.09, respectively) scavenged more frequently in rewilded habitats.

However, there was a marginally significant three-way interaction on independent assessor negative ratings ( b = -5.50, SE = 2.84, p = .056), which mirrored the three-way interaction for positive ratings.

Of all the parameters, the correlation between EMG slope at tapping onset in slow tapping and the hemibody bradykinesia and rigidity scores was marginally significant (ρ = −0.55, P = 0.056, FDR corrected).

For the latency, we found a marginally significant main effect of group with the HDs showing longer N170 latency than the CSs (179 ms vs. 172 ms, F = 3.95, p = 0.056, η 2 = 0.11)(Fig. 4a ).

For hit rates, analyses on the matched set of items revealed a marginally significant interaction, F (1, 47) = 3.84, p = 0.056, η 2 p = 0.076, similar to the one observed with the full set of stimuli.

A marginally significant interaction was found between risk amount and group (F(1, 40) = 3.875, p = 0.056, partial η2 = 0.982).

Compared with AZD8931 alone, the difference was marginally significant for SUM149 tumors ( P = 0.056) and FC-IBC-02 tumors ( P = 0.07).Finally, we examined the expression of total EGFR, HER2, HER3, phosphorylated EGFR, phosphorylated HER2, and phosphorylated HER3 in SUM149 xenografted tumors by immunohistochemistry.

In comparison, when contrasting Met and Val homozygotes, COMT effect on baseline iron was not significant (β = −0.198, p = 0.37), whereas the effect on iron accumulation was marginally significant (β = −0.496, p = 0.056).

p = 0.0043), whereas the difference in wrinkle volume was marginally significant ( adj . p = 0.056).

Types of narcissism had marginally significant main effect on other-rated creativity performance, F (2, 107) = 2.95, p = 0.056, η 2 = 0.05.

However, there was a marginally significant difference in the CPZ daily equivalent, with low-performers exhibiting higher levels than high-performers ( p = 0.056).