“extremely significant”

In contrast, these factors are not significantly correlated to EL yield, although they exhibit an extremely significant correlation with EG yield ( p < 0.01).

Differences were considered to be significant at P < 0.05 or *, extremely significant at P < 0.01 or **.

In preventive experiment, there were extremely significant differences between DC and phlorizin preventive groups on 31 and 35 days ( p < .01; Figure 3b ).

Permanova analysis of clone groups (including clone 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) based on SNP distance showed that there were extremely significant differences among different clone groups (P < 0.01), which indicated that the classification is correct.

The significance level for differences was set at P < 0.05, and the extremely significant difference level was set as P < 0.01.

Comparisons between groups were analyzed with the two-sample Student’s t test, and statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05 and extremely significant as p < 0.01.

In RStudio, the t -test was used to check whether there was a significant difference (significant: p < 0.05; extremely significant: p < 0.01) [ 29 ].

The differences were considered significant when p < 0.05 and extremely significant when p < 0.01.

The total TAS score of the A-MDD group was significantly higher than that of the NA-MDD group, and the difference between the two groups was extremely significant ( P < 0.01).

Among these sites, three were statistically significant ( p < 0.05), and two sites were extremely significant ( p < 0.01).

There were significant differences between three variables (S, Cyl, LD) and four variables (S, Cyl, LD, CCT) ( p < 0.05), and there were extremely significant differences between three variables (S, Cyl, LD) and five variables (S, Cyl, LD, CCT, E) ( p < 0.01). 3.2.

Among them, there was an extremely significant negative correlation between specific leaf area and chlorophyll content, leaf dry matter content, leaf tissue density, stomatal density ( P < 0.01), but showed an extremely significant positive correlation with stomatal size ( P < 0.01).

Secondly, SRL, SRA, RTD, and FP exhibited an extremely significant response to the interaction of N addition treatment and diameter classes ( p < 0.01).

Additionally, the ANOVA analysis was performed, and when compared with the VF group, there were extremely significant differences in the content of compounds of processed VF ( p < 0.01) ( Figure ).

This study screened microorganisms and metabolites with a correlation C value of greater than 0.99 and a CCP < 0.01 and found that Christensenellaceae_R-7_group , Ruminiclostridium_9 , Zoogloea , and the metabolites avocadene 2-acetate, lysyl-asparagine, gamma-glutamyl cysteinylserine, and biocytin have extremely significant and strong correlations ( P < 0.01).

2 and Table S 6 , most carcass traits, including slaughter weight, breast muscle weight, drumstick weight, and drumstick muscle weight, showed extremely significant negative heterosis ( P < 0.01) in reciprocal crosses of females and males.

The marker “ ∗ ” represented a significant difference between the experimental group and the control group ( P < 0.05), and “ ∗∗ ” represented an extremely significant difference between the experimental group and the control group ( P < 0.01).

The duration of the RSF (or the ecological restoration duration), vertical soil depth, and horizontal distance from the outcrops had extremely significant effects on the soil particle size distribution parameters ( p < 0.01); however, the interactions among these factors indicated significant differences ( p < 0.05).

* represented significant difference ( p < 0.05); ** represented extremely significant difference ( p < 0.01); # represented significant difference ( p < 0.05); and ## represented extremely significant difference ( p < 0.01). 3.

The difference in weight between the male and female populations was also extremely significant ( p < 0.01). 3.5.

Unless otherwise stated, the differences were considered statistically significant when p < 0.05, or extremely significant when p < 0.01.

No between-group BW differences were noted in the 80-day-old Hu sheep; however, in the 180-day-old Hu sheep, the diseased group demonstrated a extremely significant decrease in BW compared with the healthy group ( p < 0.01); the live weight before slaughter and carcass weight were also significantly lower than those in the healthy group (both p < 0.01).

NO 3 - -N was notably correlated with bacterial community diversity (Shannon and Simpson indexes), with NO 3 - -N and the Simpson index showing an extremely significant positive correlation ( r = 0.656, P < 0.01).

An extremely significant difference exists between COS I at the middle concentration and the model group ( P < 0.01) and between the COS I, the COS II and the model groups.

Irrigation methods showed extremely significant effect on the total GWP and yield-scaled GWP ( P < 0.01), while fertilization regimes had no effect on both. 4.