“extremely significant”

Notably, there were extremely significant differences in oestrus and ovulation rates between antibody-positive and antibody-negative buffaloes in Table 5 ( P < 0.05).

The expression difference level was defined using the following rules: log2fold change ≥ 0.5 or log2fold change ≤−0.5) and adjusted p -value ≤ 0.01, extremely significant (**); log2fold change ≥ 0.5 or log2fold change ≤−0.5) and 0.01 < adjusted p -value ≤ 0.05, significant (*); otherwise, insignificant. 4.5.

Table 3 and Table 4 showed that the coefficients for A, B, and C were extremely significant ( p < 0.05), indicating that sucrose, NH 4 Cl, and MgSO 4 had a remarkable influence on the antibacterial production of GBacillus-9.

Statistically significant and extremely significant differences were set at P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively.

Besides, the expression of NLRP3 in the LPS group increased after LPS treatment and extremely significant increased at 12 and 24 h ( P < 0.05).

Statistical significance was determined by p-values, with p < 0.01 indicating an extremely significant difference and p < 0.05 indicating a significant difference among groups.

sativa extracts particularly methanolic extract was extremely significant ( P <0.05) compared to the control group (normal saline) at all exposure times.

As can be seen in Table 4 , regression equation models of bowl hole molding rate Y 1 , relaxation density Y 2 and rupture-resisting strength Y 3 meet P<0.01, indicating that the model regression is extremely significant; If aberrant term of Y 1 , Y 2 and Y 3 meet P>0.05, indicating that the insufficient fit was not significant, and the regression equations have favorable fitting effect and practical analytical significance; The multiple correlation indices R 2 of Y 1 , Y 2 and Y 3 are 0.94, 0.96 and 0.94 respectively, which are all greater than 0.93, indicating that the models can explain more than 93% of response value changes, the predicted value is highly correlated to actual value and test error is small.

The levels of statistically significant and extremely significant differences were set at p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively.

P < 0.05 was considered significantly different among the means, P < 0.01 was considered extremely significant difference among the means, and P > 0.05 was considered no significant difference among the means.

If p < 0.05, there was significant difference; if p < 0.01, the difference was extremely significant; and if p > 0.05, there was no significant difference. 3.

As shown in Table 1 , metabolites 1–10 exhibited positive correlations with betanin, seven of which displayed significant or extremely significant positive correlations ( P < 0.05 or P < 0.01 ).

For the regression model, p < 0.0001 and reached an extremely significant level; the loss of fit term was 0.0716, p > 0.05.

Statistical significance was determined using the independent Student′s t -test, with value of p < 0.01 denoting an extremely significant difference and value of p < 0.05 denoting a significant difference.

**, ^^, P <0.01 indicates extremely significant differences and ns, P >0.05, indicates no significance.

Differences were considered statistically significant and statistically extremely significant when p <0.05 and p <0.01, respectively.

The differences were considered significant and extremely significant when * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01. 4.

The FACS result Indicated an extremely significant decrease of the cell population in G 0 /G 1 phase in HSF upon the PAL crude ethanol extracts (0.5, 2 mg/mL) treatment (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01).

Statistics The differences among groups were evaluated using one-way ANOVA and were considered significant and extremely significant when P ≤ 0.05 and P ≤ 0.01, respectively.

The level of significant and extremely significant differences were set at P <0.05 and P <0.01, respectively.

The highest correlations of color features in the three growth stages were obtained for 532 nm-VAR ( R = 0.39, p < 0.01), which reached extremely significant correlation, 461 nm-MEA ( R = 0.18, p < 0.05) and 522 nm-MEA ( R = −0.33, p < 0.05).

However, there were significant and extremely significant correlations with BGB, TN, and bacterial-βNTI in the mountain meadow ( p < 0.05 and p < 0.01), but no significant correlations with each index in temperate steppe ( Figure 5c ). 3.5.

dracaenophilum mycelial development, the ANOVA was extremely significant (P = 0.05) ( Table 2 ).

Correlation analysis revealed significant or extremely significant positive correlations between leaf width (LW) and leaf length (LL), leaf index (LI) and LL, fruit longitude (FL) and LL, FI and LL, and LI and FI ( P < 0.05) and between single-fruit weight (FW) and FL, FW and FD, and FI and FL ( P < 0.01), respectively, whereas a significant or extremely negative correlation was observed between pairs LI and LW and LI and FD ( P < 0.05) and between FI and FD ( P < 0.01), respectively (Fig. 2 A-C).

Because some results could be considered extremely significant, the level of significance was specified by the number of asterisks and further determined in the result section as: * = p < 0.05; ** = p < 0.025; *** = p < 0.0001.