“highly significant”

(2) was highly significant (p < 0.0001); while the unfitting F value of 6.09 with p > 0.05, indicated a high degree of precision and credibility of this model.

Nonetheless, there was a highly significant association between the densities of the two species in mixed infection in individual animals ( p < 0.0001).

Network events resulted in a highly significant positive shift in [Cl − ] i ( P < 0.0001, t -test, n = 75 network events from 16 neurons) and an acidic shift in pH i ( P < 0.0001, t -test, Figures 4A,B ).

Compared to control cells, MSCs exposed continuously to either cigarette or e-cigarette smoke aerosol extracts exhibited a highly significant inhibition of cell viability, with 30% and <60% of MSCs surviving the 2-week cigarette and e-cigarette smoke aerosol extract exposure ( p < .0001), respectively.

Results were annotated as follows: p < 0.05 (*; significant), p < 0.001 (**; highly significant), and p < 0.0001 (***; very highly significant).

The blastocyst formation rate showed a statistically highly significant age-dependent decline (p < 0.0001).

In the multivariate logistic regression analyses (Table 4 ), confidence in the ability to use epinephrine in patients with anaphylaxis remained a highly significant predictor (OR = 2.84, 95% CI = 1.68–4.80, P = 0.0001).

The AMP concentrations evaluated here revealed 97% to 99% cell viability; the opposite effect was observed in DMSO-treated cells (12% viability), having highly significant differences (p < 0.0001) when comparing the concentrations evaluated here ( Fig. 7 ).

theobaldi and ostracod numbers were highly significant in the wet season (Pillai's F 8, 88 = 3.959, P < 0.0001).

Data were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05 (* p < 0.05, significant; ** p < 0.01, very significant; *** p < 0.001, highly significant; **** p < 0.0001, extremely significant). 3.

Morphometric analysis revealed a highly significant reduction in cell size in the spt7Δ mutant compared to WT ( p < 0.0001, Figure 6 B). 3.4.

The model showed that chromosome identity had a highly significant effect on pairing success ( P < 0.0001), indicating consistent interchromosomal differences in pairing likelihood.

The overall model for time, treatment and route was highly significant (R 2 = 0.5055; p < 0.0001).

All group comparisons were highly significant ( p <0.0001).

The repeated measures analysis of feather brightness resulted in a final model that included highly significant effects of exposure time ( F 1,590.44 =26.09, P <0.0001) and pigment identity ( F 1,514.84 =4.06, P =0.044).

In SARS-CoV-2-infected cultures, there was a transient but highly significant 3.3× decrease in relative TEER at 4 dpi (Fig. 1H ; P < 0.0001).

Degrees of significance were assessed by three different rating values: * p 0.05 (significant), ** p 0.01 (highly significant), *** p 0.001 (extremely significant), and **** p ≤ 0.0001 (extremely significant) or non-significant ( p 0.05). 5.

Following data reduction using PCA there was a highly significant difference in the PERMANOVA ( P =0.0001) in the post-test analysis between the following groups of cats: healthy and FORL-1 ( P <0.0001), FORL-1 and FORL-2 ( P <0.0001).

In contrast, cells treated with DMSO showed a marked and highly significant inhibition of proliferation, with a reduced mean count of 379,333 ± 23 (*** P < 0.0001) as compared to untreated cells.

The differences between CC and MLO projections were highly significant ( p < 0.0001).

There was a non-significant value of lack of fit found in the statistical analyses ( p > 0.05), and a highly significant level of performance of the model measured at the parameter level ( p < 0.0001), which indicates that the mode is capable of being accurately predicted by the variation of the parameters (Prajapati et al. 2021 ).

For stem diameter, the Treatment effect was not significant across corrections (Greenhouse–Geisser: MS = 6.23, F = 1.27, p = 0.332), but the effect of Time was highly significant (MS = 83.02, F = 123.96, p < 0.0001), showing consistent increases in stem diameter across weeks.

The analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the quadratic models of ethanol concentration, and productivity were highly significant, as p < 0.0001, and p = 0.0001, respectively (Table 3 ).

8%), were highly significant ( p = 0.0001).

In addition, the genotype ( G ), environment ( E ) and genotype × environment interaction ( G × E ) variances of the branch number trait were highly significant ( P < 0.0001 ) in the GWAS panel (Table 1 ).