“highly significant”

When negative control levels were compared with positive control levels for MTH1 and APE1, highly significant differences were observed (p < 0.0001 vs p = 0.0035) ( Figure 2 A & B & Figure 3 A & B).

Statistical analysis (ANOVA) showed highly significant effects between the groups ( P < 0.0001) on surface microhardness.

For the cabbage diallel study, there were highly significant differences (P < 0.0001) among the genotypes, and based on this result, the user can proceed with interpretation of results from other analyses proposed by Hayman ( 1954b ).

The difference between the two groups was highly significant (Mann–Whitney Rank Sum test p = 0.0001).

The difference between observed and expected distributions (both directions) was highly significant ( Chi 2 test, p<0.0001).

As shown in Figure 3 , rEg.P29 alone did not induce a significant increase in specific IgG at 20 weeks post-immunization, whereas the formulation with Quil A adjuvant elicited a highly significant increase in rEg.P29-specific IgG ( P < 0.0001), confirming that Quil A is essential for inducing a robust IgG-dominant humoral immune response in sheep.

The repeated‐measures ANOVA revealed a highly significant difference among total, dominant, and nondominant mBF (F(2,334) = 136.30, p < 0.0001).

[ 46 ] assessed the accuracy of the Invu system at recording the FHR using simultaneous CTG; a highly significant correlation was reported been the two modalities (r = 0.92, p<0.0001).

Scutum and sensilla size variation There was no significant difference in the (seven-landmark) CS of S1 (0.059 mm) and S2 (0.060 mm) (P = 0.2058), and also no significant difference in the scutum perimeter of S1 (0.182 mm) and S2 (0.184 mm) (P = 0.2058), but there was a highly significant difference in size (P < 0.0001) between the perimeters of sensilla S1 (0.047 mm) and S2 (0.050 mm) ( Fig. 3 ; Table 3 ). 3.1.2.

As shown in Table S10 , the model had F = 10.65 and was highly significant ( p < 0.0001), while the lack of fit was not significant ( p = 0.0652 > 0.05).

The correlation was statistically highly significant (the p -value being p = 0.0001***).

The clustering observed was found to be highly significant, and we identified 159 unexpectedly large (at least 400 Kb; p<1e-04) clusters of divergent regions with a median size of 800 Kb ( Figure 3 ; Table S2 ).

The mortality was not significantly different between patients with and without complications ( P = 0.52), while there was a highly significant difference in LOS between subjects with and without complications (median, 6 versus 18 days, respectively, P < 0.0001).

According to the model fit statistics, the quadratic model is suggested to be highly significant among linear, 2-factor interactions (2FI), and quadratic models for turbidity ( p = 0.0001), COD ( p = 0.0004) removal, and residual Al ( p = 0.0274) implying high correlation coefficient (R 2 ) values, 0.9831, 0.9838, and 0.9775, respectively.

As expected, we observed a highly significant inverse correlation between CAG repeat numbers and the AAO in a multivariate linear regression analysis ( P < 0.0001), both for the individual sub-cohorts (Supplementary Table S9) and combined cohorts of MJD patients (Fig. 1 e; Table 2 ; Supplementary Table S9).

Highly significant association was found between naive CD4 T cells and CD4+ RTE (all p-values <0.0001).

The analysis outlined a three‐factor model of the preliminary 17‐item instrument with notably insufficient fit to the data by a highly significant Satorra–Bentler scaled chi‐square (S‐Bχ2 = 351.40; df = 116 p < .0001) and CFI markedly lower than 0.95 (CFI = 0.798), an excessively high value of SRMR = 0.112, and RMSEA = 0.092 (90% CI = 0.081–0.10).

Together with the highly significant differences (Two‐tailed paired t ‐test P < 0.0001; n = 65) in the average (±SD) counts of unique gene clusters obtained from complete versus complete plus partial gene catalogues ( Supplementary Data 1 ) suggests a strong effect of partial gene sequences on gene diversity, and in turn, gene discovery.

Notwithstanding the smaller sample size at FP + 14, the platelet increase observed at FP + 14 was highly significant (p < 0.0001).

Using the same background subtraction procedure, a lifetime of 2.5 ± 0.03 ns was obtained for EGFR–eGFP in the presence of EGF and Grb2–mRFP. A Student’s t test revealed that the difference in apparent lifetimes (2.85 vs 2.50 ns) was highly significant ( p < 0.0001, standard error about the mean 0.03 ns, sample size = 50).

Genotype explained a highly significant ( P < 0.0001) proportion of the variation for every trait except plant lifespan ( Table 2 ).

4 , the overall effect of ondansetron was a reduction of the R+V by about 70% (−0.69, −0.82 to −0.55) and this was highly significant ( Z = 10.05, P < 0.0001).

The difference in VMI between tumour and reduction mammoplasty breast was again highly significant (Figure 1A or B vs C, P < 0.0001, unpaired ranked sums, Figure 2), as was the difference in the tumour and paired adjacent normal tissue (B vs C, P < 0.0001, Figure 2).

The difference between NK cell cytotoxicity from patients (samples were taken before therapy) and healthy donors was highly significant ( P = 0.0001).

The level of significance was evaluated using P-values, with the following classifications: P≥0.05 denotes non-significant results, P≤0.05 denotes significant results, P≤ 0.01 denotes highly significant results, and P≤0.0001 denotes very highly significant results.