“only marginally significant”

The correlation was moderate but only marginally significant, r = 0.412, t (19) = 1.970, p = 0.064.

In addition, a higher proportion of B cells (CD19, Fig 1C ) was also found, however this result was only marginally significant (P = 0.064).

aged mice among females ( p = 0.0016) and overall (averaged over gender, p = 0.0005), but the effect was only marginally significant among males ( p = 0.0643) (Figures 3J,K ).

By adding 15 old adults to the older adults group, this effect is now only marginally significant (t(347) = 2.249; p = 0.0646).

The congruency effect for uncertain trials was only marginally significant [ t (36) = 1.90, p = 0.065].

After further filtering the sets of paralogs (see answer 2), the difference is only marginally significant (P=0.065).

The cognitive load main effect was only marginally significant, F (3,66) = 2.52, p = 0.065, η 2 p = 0.10, but pairwise comparisons failed to reveal any significant difference (all p s ≥ 0.115).

At −150 ms SOA, there was a significant effect of part-relation by participants, F 1(1, 26) = 8.46, p = 0.007 partial η 2 = 0.25, but was only marginally significant by items F 2(1, 23) = 3.77, p = 0.065, partial η 2 = 0.14.

We observed a negative, though only marginally significant, trend in the relationship between dominant producer abundance and productivity ( F 1,8 = 4.59, p = .065), while consumer abundance and productivity were positively associated ( F 1,8 = 9.92, p = .013).

In a supplementary analysis we tested this left-right horizontal meridian asymmetry using an extended dataset ( n = 54; the 29 observers here and 25 additional observers for whom we have retinotopy measurements but no psychophysics data) and found the slight bias for more surface area along the right than left horizontal meridian was diminished and became only marginally significant ( p = 0.065), d = 0.26; Supplementary Fig. 2 ).

In our analysis, when separating by climate, the correlation between soil biodiversity and multifunctionality was only marginally significant under future climate (R 2 = 0.14, p = 0.065).

We found that this was indeed the case, with the exception of the right CAUD ROI, where the correlation remained only marginally significant ( p = 0.065).

The results showed that the main effect of the creator’s situation ( F (1, 572) = 18.828, p < .001, η p 2 = .019) and the RIBS ( F (1, 572) = 8.807, p = .003, η p 2 = .022) were significant, while that of sympathy was only marginally significant ( F (1, 572) = 3.410, p = .065, η p 2 = .005).

The average width of the palatal fistula was negatively associated with the overall pooled success rate, although the association was only marginally significant (coefficient = -0.106, p = 0.065).

In addition, those with a current presence of infection had also higher risk for anemia compared with those who were healthy, although this was only marginally significant (p = 0.065).

During free activity, X-axis skewness showed the largest effect size; although this effect was only marginally significant ( p = 0.065), it showed a consistent directional pattern.

The correlation with the total IADL-C score was only marginally significant (r = -0.186, df = 98, p < 0.065).

Results The mean value of RFS was higher in elderly women (30.7 ± 7.6) than elderly men (29.5 ± 8.8), but the difference was only marginally significant ( P = 0.065).

The relationship between gender mix and the effectiveness of aspirin in reducing the combined end point of fatal and non-fatal MI was only marginally significant (R 2 = 0.21, p = 0.065).

Interestingly, the mean weight in the remission group was higher although the difference was only marginally significant ( P = 0.065).

Indeed, although the difference was only marginally significant ( p = 0.065), we did find lower risk-taking scores in female than male participants.

On the other hand, we observed that TEs with PCH interactions tend to be closer to genes than TEs without such interactions, although the analysis is only marginally significant ( Mann-Whitney U test , p = 0.065).

The planned comparison was however only marginally significant (estimate = 24, SD = 13, t = 1.851, p = 0.065).

ciliata , estimated mean dispersal distances ranged between δ = 0.23 and 0.71 m ( Table 2 ), although differences were only marginally significant ( χ 2 4 d.f. = 8.846, p = 0.065).

Note that we applied the step-wise analysis even though CC in Epoch 10 (28 ms) was only marginally significant, t (44) = −1.54, p = .065, d = 0.23.