“highly significant”

A quantitative analysis of LC3 and HSV-1-gD co-staining revealed a highly significant ( p = 1.42 × 10 -10 ) 4.5-fold increment of the Mean Colocalization Index (CI) in infected caspase-8−/− as compared to wt MEFs (Fig. 7D ).

Furthermore, at 8 dpi, Ago2 expression was even more pronounced, with a highly significant increase ( p = 1.42 × 10 −10 ), suggesting a strong activation of the RNA interference (RNAi) pathway in response to OROV infection.

The year of cultivation had a highly significant effect on all traits, with p -values ≤ 1.426 × 10 −10 , except for C18:2, which had a higher p -value of 0.014 but was still statistically significant.

The difference in mCG levels in this window between the two groups of promoters is highly significant (genes with only promoter H3.3-enriched nucleosomes compared to genes with only TTS H3.3 nucleosomes, P -value = 1.46 × 10 -10 , Wilcoxon’s rank test, one tail).

From the genome-wide binomial test, C1orf127 showed highly significant enrichment for damaging RGs (enrichment = 176.8, P = 1.5 × 10 −10 ; Fig. 1 A ) and a greater enrichment for LoF RGs (enrichment = 392.4, P = 2.6 × 10 −12 ; SI Appendix , Fig.

*: difference with driver alone highly significant ( p<1.5 10 −10 , T Test). **: difference with driver alone significant ( p = 0.03 , Fisher's exact test); ***: difference with driver alone highly significant ( p<0.005 , Fisher's exact test).

However, we also identified other highly significant targets, such as GDP dissociation inhibitor 1 (GDI1; P = 1.54 × 10 −10 ) and SPARC-related modular calcium binding 1 (SMOC1; P = 6.93 × 10 −9 ).

Nevertheless, we observed a highly significant, monotonic correlation between the length of differentiation of the hCS in vitro and their predicted methylation age (r = +0.76, p = 1.57e −10 ; Figure 1a ), consistent with continuous and progressive maturation of these cultures over time.

A highly significant overlap was found ( P = 1.73e-10).

First, smokers had a highly significant ( p = 1.8 × 10 −10 ) increase in the peripheral CD3 + T cells expressing GPR15 (15.5% in smokers vs. 3.7% in non-smokers), and to a lesser extent B cells, and second, these GPR15 + CD3 + T cells had a markedly lower average methylation of cg19859270 than GPR15 − CD3 + T cells, resulting in the arithmetic difference in mean methylation at cg19859270 observed in whole blood.

This was highly significant ( p = 1.84 × 10 ‐10 , Figure 5J ), indicating that clustering and colocalization of telomeres with 53BP1 damage foci normally occurs as cells senesce.

In the model fitted to untransformed RMS values, the main effect of diameter was not significant ( χ2 = 0.93, df = 3, p = 0.820), the main effect of depth was borderline ( χ2 = 6.70, df = 3, p = 0.080), and there was a highly significant diameter-by-depth interaction ( χ2 = 56.89, df = 6, p = 1.9 × 10−10).

The likelihood-ratio test gave a highly significant result (likelihood-ratio statistic was 48.22149, P = 1.9 e-10).

Mean current density had a highly significant relationship with estimated abundance of dragonflies (R 2 = 0.58, p = 1.92 × 10 –10 , Fig. 2 a).

By contrast, the differences between our data and the distribution given by Linzmeier and Ganz [ 7 ] based on real-time PCR measurements are highly significant (Table 3 ), especially in the representation of copy numbers above 8 (P = 1.95 × 10 -10 ).

When data from all kinases were pooled, a moderate positive correlation was observed between the percentage of Class I fragments and NVA avg (r = 0.52), which remained highly significant (p = 1.97 × 10− 10 ), indicating a robust global association across systems.

In the case of the consistently down-regulated TFs we found one highly significant model ( P ≤1.99×10 −10 ) composed of six elements corresponding to TFBS for E2FF, RXRF (Retinoid × receptor heterodimer-binding sites), KLFS (Kruppel-like factors) and ZF02 (C2H2 zinc finger transcription factors 2).

t-test demonstrated a highly significant difference between healthy mucosa and tumour tissue (P < 0.0000000002), between peritumoral mucosa and British Journal of Cancer (1998) 78(6), 765-770 A 8000- B Ul) 0~ L- '8 .0 78 0) 0~ 6000 4000 2000 - I Healthy mucosa Peritumoral mucosa A- C 30

Statistical analysis showed that the differences between these groups are highly significant (p = 2 × 10 -10 and p = 5 × 10 -10 , respectively).

2f-h ) and are highly significant ( P < 2E10 −3 ) in accurately describing the relative contribution of each TALE ( Supplementary Table 3 ).

The difference between luciferase reporters remained highly significant [ F (1, 48) = 64.2, p <2.10e −10 ].

Risk post‐RP The post‐RP CCR score was a highly significant predictor of metastasis after RP (HR per unit score, 2.03 [95% CI: 1.66, 2.48]; p = 2.1 × 10 −10 ).

As a result, group comparisons were performed with a Kruskal–Wallis test, which showed a highly significant effect of expertise level on S (d, s) (H = 44.42, p = 2.26 × 10 −10 ; Table 2b ).

A multivariate, ANOVA-type analysis showed that time was a highly significant factor for lesion severity ( P = 2.29x10 -10 ).

The first of these, TRIOBP , was observed to be significant in our discovery cohort but not in the replication cohorts, while the other is NDE1 itself, which was highly significant in the larger GTEx database (β = 0.24; s.e. = 0.037; t -statistic = 6.6; p = 2.3 × 10 −10 ), but not originally observed in our discovery cohort.