Excerpts

However, when each climatic variable was individually reduced from the full model, Tmin, Tmax were not significant and rainfall was only marginally significant (AIC = 428, P = 0.05) (Table 1 ).

However, significant associations were presented between free testosterone and locomotor area in model 1 & model 2(0.38, 0.0–0.7, p = 0.04, 0.37, 0.0–0.7, p = 0.04) with borderline significance in model 3 (0.34, − 0.0, 0.7, p = 0.05), respectively (Tables 2 , 3 , 4 ).

Analysis of data indicated a very highly significant ( P ≤ 0.05) difference on moisture content among the samples procured from various agroclimatic conditions.

Only p62 expression showed a strong trend (Fisher’s LSD, p = 0.05) between the moderate and strong group expression levels with a mean age of 76 years vs. 60.4 years, respectively.

The CTL group’s SampEn complexity comparison was marginally non-significant (p > 0.05).

Our analysis did not display anymore significant or borderline significant difference in study’s variables within tertiles of DQI-I, HEI-2015 and DPI ( P > 0.05).

However, codY had an increasing trend during the log and stationary growth phases in strain CT-43 (2.0-, 5.3-, and 18.0-fold compared with the LS phase, P < 0.05, T-test).

The mast cells were found to manifest borderline significance (P = 0.050).

Negative sensory descriptors such as musty or earthy odor and taste were minimally perceived and did not reach statistical significance (p < 0.05).

The ratio of deaths with ≥ 2500 g, considered potentially avoidable, showed a significant trend of growth with the increase in vulnerability ( p < 0.05) (Fig. 3 ).

Notably, significant upregulation of the keratinocyte terminal differentiation marker filaggrin (FLG; + 308%; P < 0.001) and a clear trend towards an increase (+ 132%; P = 0.05) in transcript levels of the epidermal differentiation complex protein loricrin (LOR) was observed in skin from SGC707-treated mice (Fig. 4 C).

Statistical T Tests were conducted and the results show that there is a borderline significant difference between the average Weighted F1-scores of EEGNet and LSTM-EEGNet, which has t(5)=2.029; p-value=0.050 with .

Protein content White soft cheese showed a clearly significant ( P < 0.05) decrease in protein content during the pickling period in all treatments.

Conversely, IL-1β (either alone or as an interaction with BMI groups) was significantly associated with the outcome in 7 of 12 possible regression models with a statistical trend in another 2 models (p = 0.05).

Among these 17 SNPs, the only one that was not located in a suggestive or genome-wide significant locus in the discovery meta-GWAS but showed a nominally significant association was rs10490924 at ARMS2 (effect allele/non-effect allele: T/G, Z-score = − 1.96, P = 0.050).

E = 0.448, p < 0.001), and DSP showed marginal significance ( p = 0.05).

A negative correlation was observed between myopia levels and PSA, albeit marginally significant ( r =-0.189*, P = 0.05).

Notably, residential PSA exhibited a negative correlation with the level of myopia, albeit with marginal significance ( r =-0.189, P = 0.05).

A two-way ANOVA with factors of treatment type and session found an interaction that approached significance, F (2, 33) = 3.78, p = 0.050, η 2 = 0.116.

Although association of exposure score was not statistically significant, it showed a positive trend (β = 0.02; 95% CI 0.04, 0.00; p-value = 0.05).

For the H2OPal and the Thermos bottles, there was a borderline significant difference (p < 0.05) using the Welsh test for unequal variance.

This equates to an odds ratio of 1.2 – 1.4; in other words, the odds of participation is 1.2–1.4 times higher given a 1-unit increase ‘intrinsic (pro-nature) motivation.’ Native Hawaiian ethnicity was also highly significant and positive in two of the models ( β = 1.6 ± 0.6, p < 0.05 at 0.25% payment threshold and β = 2.0 ± 0.7, p < 0.01 at 0.5% threshold), equating to an odds ratio of 5.0 and 7.4, respectively.

Pooled analysis Metabolites with nominally significant differences (p<0.05) and trends (0.05<p<0.10) between screening and Year 3 within the FP and AP groups Metabolites that were nominally different are reported in Table 2 with circulating concentrations reported in Table S1.

6B ), but there was a borderline significant negative correlation between FEV 1 /FVC and HLF expression of HAS2 (FEV 1 /FVC: r = −0.56, P = 0.05, Fig. 6C ).

These differences approached the level of significance when compared with the median values of HS (p = 0.05 and p = 0.04, respectively), but were significantly lower than the value seen in PC patients (p < 0.0001).