Differences between urban and rural farms were highly significant (P<0.001) but negligible in magnitude (difference in overall means: <1 degree F).
Excerpts
When uniquely genotype C patients were taken into account, a higher proportion of mutations, reaching a highly significant statistical difference (p<0.001), was found among patients with disease progression to LC and HCC (Group 3).
Twenty four hour hypoxia treatment of 24 and 48 hpf embryos resulted in 3.4∼5.5 fold, highly significant increases (p<0.001) in IGFBP-1a mRNA levels and modest but statistically significant increases in IGFBP-1b mRNA levels (2.1 and 2.6 fold increases, p<0.01∼0.05).
This difference is highly significant (p<0.001) for the number of nucleotides involved.
Statistical analysis of relative gene expression data revealed highly significant differences in expression between individual snakes (p = 0.001).
In an ANOVA, the effect of continent (fixed) was not significant (F = 2.298; df = 1,8; P = 0.204); the effect of site (nested, random) was not significant (F = 1.224; df = 8,4; P = 0.424), but the effect of time (fixed) after application was highly significant ((F = 10.535; df = 4,160); P<0.001).
There was a significant trend (p<0.001) for odds of vaccination with increasing categories of age.
Critically, the relationship between HTA steps and completion time remained highly significant after controlling for presentation order (partial r = 0.814, p < .001), indicating that the complexity-performance association is not an artifact of cross-device learning.
A highly significant effect of auditory load was found on reaction time in the visual search task F (2.73,35.47) = 29.29, p < .001; η 2 = .69, showing that visual target reaction time increased as auditory task demands increased.
The variance in allele sizes ( Vp ) is relatively variable among population groups, especially so for the Frequency dataset ( Figure 2A ), and the differences for this last dataset are indeed highly significant (Kruskal-Wallis test, P<0.001 ).
Galling Insect Richness x Tree Species x Forest Type Our initial (maximal) model was highly significant (d.f. = 36,41; P<0.001) and explained 83% of variability observed in the galling insect richness (GIR).
Results Cross-sectional linear and quadratic regressions of PDE with age in mandrills and baboons for M1 and M2 teeth yielded highly significant positive relationships ( p <0.001 in all cases), although quadratic regressions were always more informative, following the Akaike information criterion (AIC) ( Table 1 ).
both controls and the difference was highly significant (p<0.001).
Age was found to be statistically highly significant (χ2 = 22.05; p = 0.001) with anxiety.
Similarly, pairwise comparisons of infected and uninfected females for the OTU composition of the bacterial microbiomes were highly significant ( P = 0.001).
Remarkably, there was a highly significant correlation (Spearman’s rho = 0.95, p<0.001) between BRCA1 and BRCA2 expression in the 19 cell lines ( Table 1 ), suggesting that these genes are co-regulated in HNSCC, similar to what has been shown in mammary epithelial cells [35] .
Further, Fu's Fs test detected highly significant departures from the neutral/equilibrium expectations (p<0.001).
For household work, all the factors were highly significant (each with P = 0.001).
BE/BT and BE/Bd also provide no significant differences when a Bonferroni’s correction is applied) have highly significant scores ( p value<0.001) thus confirming the significance of the separation between the two groups.
The SRTs predicted by the fitted GLM showed a highly significant correlation coefficient with measured SRTs (r = 0.79, p = 0.001), explaining 62% of the total variance.
And the difference between them is highly significant (P < 0.001), indicating that the cells on E and SE surfaces grow better.
One effect from each study is highly significant ( p = .001) and the other two effects are closer to the p < .05 criterion: p = .025 and p = .049.
Finally, the interaction effect between muscle group and body position was highly significant (F 1.592,30.256 = 16.078, P < .001, η p 2 = .458; Fig 3A2 ), and showed that the relationship between the response amplitudes differed between body positions.
The differences between the four frequencies were highly significant ( Χ 2 = 139.68, df = 3, p < 0.001), and so was the pairwise difference between the recommendations made for the Democratic and Republican parties ( z = 5.05, p < 0.001).
The model was highly significant in that it predicted documented panther locations statistically better ( p < 0.001) than 1,000 random models, which means that its accuracy was significantly higher than what would be expected by chance alone.