“highly significant”

The impaired ability of the Exon 12 −/− mice to run on the rotorod at greater than moderate speeds is the most obvious and highly significant phenotype of the behavioral testing ( P < 0.0001).

Upon HFD, the mice had a progressive body weight gain ( Figure 1 a), which was highly significant at 16 weeks ( P < 0.0001) ( Figure 1 b).

These effects were highly significant after adjustment for multiple comparisons (p<0.0001, Table S2 ).

To further validate the relevance of Sox9 and Sparc for the osteo‐lineage cells and chondrocyte populations, we analyzed the coexpression of the regulating element ( Sox9 ) with the osteonectin coding gene ( Sparc ), which was highly significant ( R = 0.86, p < 0.0001, Fig. 3 G ).

Moreover, we found that it was correlated (using Spearman correlation) with the GC content of the region (corr = 0.13), the fraction of region that was protein coding (corr = 0.26) and the level of gene expression (only available for 71% of genes; corr = 0.20), all highly significant ( P < 0.0001).

Across all 4 genes, results were highly significant ( t df = 141 = −5.72, P < 0.0001), suggesting that EGC was indeed selected against around those amino acids.

Allelic association tests yielded 93 highly significant SNPs (p < 10 -4 , corrected for permutation tests).

The changes in expression between ab and scrib − + ab samples were also all highly significant (p<0.0001).

SNVs showing highly significant association ( p < 0.0001) mapped to pathways related to neuronal signaling, axon guidance, neural cell adhesion molecule interactions and acetylation, extracellular matrix (ECM) organization, olfactory signaling, Rho-GTPase cycle, and G- α signaling events ( Supplementary Figure S1 ).

The results depicted in Figure 3 - for the TBRs, mf prevalence breakpoints and R 0 - show not only that a wide distribution of values is consistent with the data in each study community when the model is fitted to mf age prevalence but also that they can vary significantly between the study communities [kruskal-wallis tests of differences in estimated values of each variable indicating highly significant study effects in each case ( P < 0.0001 in each case)].

When the MGEs are included (Figure 5a ), all pairwise comparisons between the four different sub-groups (fourth, Asian, Turkish and South American) show highly significant differences ( P < 0.0001; red arrows) except for the fourth sub-group versus South American ( P < 0.05; brown arrow).

Two-way repeated measures ANOVA revealed a highly significant effect of DHβE (F 1,9 = 122.21, P <0.0001) and no significant interaction between sex and the effects of DHβE on nicotinic currents.

The main effects of stimulus intensity, recording site, and their interactions were all highly significant, F4,152 = 96.29, p < 0.0001, η 2 = 0.82; F2,76 = 68.75, p < 0.0001, η 2 = 0.73; and F8,304 = 5.06, p < 0.0001, η 2 = 0.72.

For MSP2-3D7, the different methods of coupling resulted in highly significant differences in antibody-binding affinities (p < 0.0001 for all comparisons, except between N- and C-terminal His-tagged couplings where no difference could be seen).

4b , interaction plots from two-way ANCOVA confirm this observation, revealing a highly significant sex*PD interaction for PC2 ( P < 0.0001) and lack of significant sex- or PD-related differences or interaction for PC1.

When comparing the PI and mSBI, it was found that there was a highly significant drop from baseline to 6 months ( P = 0.0001).

However, these differences might be expected if the PH assumption is violated; each prognostic factor had highly significant tests for PH assumption violation based on Schoenfeld residuals in model (c) ( P <0.0001).

Second, ANOVAs performed on male and female fitness returned highly significant differences between hemiclones across laboratories, but no hemiclone‐by‐laboratory effects (females: hemiclone—F 8,45 = 11.42, P < 0.0001, hemiclone‐by‐laboratory—F 8,45 = 1.19, P = 0.33; males: hemiclone—F 8,63 = 11.34, P < 0.0001, hemiclone‐by‐laboratory—F 8,45 = 1.54, P = 0.16; laboratory term nonsignificant in both analyses, as expected for Z‐transformed fitness data).

The third group (GR3) included GSTP-1, H-FABP, TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6, IL-10, CXCL8 and CXCL10, for which the difference between stages was highly significant ( p <0.0001, Mann-Whitney U test) ( Figure S2 ).

These results were independent of LPS stimulation, and the differences against control experiments were highly significant ( p < 0.0001). 2.5.

This linear trend of increasing total STarT-G score with an increasing number of somatic symptoms was highly significant (Jonckheere–Terpstra test, P < 0.0001).

The difference between the two species is also highly significant ( P < 0.0001), with the main contribution to the difference from +4 sites following UAG and UGA.

K S and the block size show a strong negative correlation, and Pearson's correlation coefficient is r = −0.288, which is highly significant ( p <0.0001, permutation test).

However, the combination of drought and deforestation dried out almost all transplanted bromeliads (WV = 0 mL in each bromeliad, except for one plant subjected to simultaneous disturbances), so there was highly significant difference in pairwise comparisons testing combined disturbances vs control or vs drought alone in the forest ( p < 0.0001 for all).

However, considering SIRI, simple linear regression shows a highly significant statistical correlation of this index with age, with an increase in SIRI values according to age ( Figure 2 a; R 2 = 0.08; p -value <0.0001), although significant heterogeneity exists at extreme ages ( Figure S5 ).