A statistically highly significant difference in Kd (mean of 7.04/0.94/0.00, p < 0.001) between the three categories a–c, respectively, could be found using the Kruskal-Wallis test.
Excerpts
Gene set tests were highly significant for both Schmid versus wildtype and Cog versus wildtype ( p ≤0.001 in each case).
Dual luciferase activities were detected in different groups, with the results showing that, compared with the control group, dual luciferase activity in the treatment group was significantly reduced (by about 1.7 times), at extremely significant level ( P < 0.001, Fig 4B ).
Both models revealed a highly significant overall and nonlinear association between platelet levels and outcomes (overall P < 0.001; nonlinear P < 0.001). 4.
In that study, a statistically highly significant (p<0.001) difference lasted for 4 hours without overlapping SEM values at any time point.
The decrease in conidia production in the Δ Fgac1 mutant is highly significant according to t -test (p<0.001).
[ 39 ] from the same samples, a Spearman rank-order correlation shows a highly significant correlation ( p <.001) with correlation coefficients of ρ > 0.8, further supporting our data.
Our study showed that flooding has a highly significant effect ( P <0.001) on AMF diversity (based on phylotype richness, Shannon's index and phylotype composition), and the effects are dependent on the degree of flooding.
The results of chi-square tests showed highly significant associations (p<0.001) of exposure to all types of mass media with background characteristics of Indian women.
Among these, 16 cancer types exhibited highly significant expression changes (p < 0.001), while one cancer type showed significance at p < 0.01 and another at p < 0.05, indicating a strong and consistent pan-cancer association of AURKA.
Exogamy Linguistic exogamy overall was highly significant (p = 0.001) and associated with high borrowing in the total sample.
Comparisons between the different treatment groups were analyzed via one-way ANOVA and the least significant difference (LSD), and differences were considered significant at p < 0.05 * and highly significant at p < 0.001.
Moreover, inter-item correlations for the 5 CAS items were all highly significant, the coefficient values ranged from .52 to .77 ( p < .001).
The differences between subtype A serum neutralization of A and CRF02_AG viruses (77% positive) versus neutralization of non-A (B, C, D) viruses (44% positive) was highly significant (p<0.001, Fisher's exact test).
As the left panel of Figure 4B suggests, the significant interaction is due to a highly significant quadratic trend in the Double condition (F(1,9) = 26.26, p = .001), and not in the Single condition (F(1,9) = .007, p = .937).
The association between PPH and anaemia status at discharge from the hospital was highly significant (p<0.001), while there was no association between PPH and anaemia during pregnancy or at 6 weeks postpartum.
The overall Φ ST was highly significant (0.35, P<0.001) and varied between zero and 0.63 (Doñana vs.
Independently from age we found low, but highly significant correlations (p<.001) between negative affect and suppression in the subsample with implicit emotional awareness.
The resulting quadratic function (y = .091x 2 –1.491x + 9.980) was highly significant, explaining 74.06% of the variance ( r = .86; F (2, 1118) = 1596.3, p < .001) (see Fig 2 ).
For the lack of the scope of communicating with the students of the companies, it caused highly significant depression (p < 0.001) also significant stress (p = 0.041).
When perceived severity, perceived susceptibility, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, cues to action, and self-efficacy in dieting and self-efficacy in exercise were regressed against BMI, the model was highly significant (P<0.001).
Across all years, the Kruskal-Wallis test yielded highly significant results (p < 0.001), indicating significant differences in dengue incidence among the three categories.
Whereas agency terms in the antisemitic text showed no significant trend before the Holocaust, agency terms in the control text showed an increasing trend during this time, b 1 = 0.01, 95% CI [0.005, 0.011], SE = 0.001, t = 4.92, p < .001.
Food Plant Preference 24 h after LCA Damage Determination of food plant preferences revealed a highly significant response that strongly depended on the different treatments applied ( Fig. 1B ; univariate ANOVA: F 4, 103 = 10.065, P<0.001), while colony identity did not affect the model (‘ant colony’ as random factor, univariate ANOVA: F 2, 103 = 0.315, P>0.05).
All these correlations were highly significant (p<0.001).