“highly significant”

Differences were considered significant when p<0.01 (*), and highly significant when p<0.0001 (***).

As expected, predicted expression varied in a manner consistent with the codon usage bias measures: genes near O2 and O3 are predicted to be expressed most and those distant from origins significantly less ( supplementary table S2 , Supplementary Material online), and the genome-wide regression of MELP on distance to the nearest origin was also highly significant ( Fig 4 , F = 96.2, P < 0.0001), albeit weakly predictive ( r 2 = 0.05).

Patients with bone pain at study inclusion demonstrated a distinct bone-centric disease pattern, characterized by highly significant increases in osteolytic lesions with structural instability risk (25% vs. 11%, p = 0.0001) and higher prevalence of CRAB-B already present at ID (90% vs. 78%, p = 0.003).

As expected, the discriminatory ability of all five cryptic RNAs was highly significant ( P < 0.0001) in the frontal cortex and amygdala in FTLD-TDP, with AUC ranging 0.79–0.98 in amygdala and 0.81–0.94 in frontal cortex (Fig.

Measurement error The ANOVAs for centroid size and shape both reveal that the “Individual” main effect is highly significant ( P < 0.0001), which means that the variation among flowers greatly exceeds the measurement error due to “Imaging” and “Digitising” ( Table 1 ).

There was a highly significant ( P ≤ 0.0001) effect for reaction time with 30 min > 20 min > 10 min.

Statistical analysis using the Student’s t -test for related samples showed a highly significant difference between pre- and post-test scores ( p < 0.0001), indicating a strong effect of the intervention on stress reduction.

This difference in prevalence was highly significant ( P < .0001).

This difference in maximum lodscores was highly significant (p < 0.0001), implying that the effect of this chromosome may vary with age.

The model for the <65 age group provided a good fit to the data and was highly significant (F 3,26 =346.34, P <0.0001), with a significant breakpoint in the third quarter of 2011 ( P <0.001) ( Figure 3 ).

Statistical significance of the scavenging and inhibitory activities was assessed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) across all concentrations and treatment groups followed by Tukey’s Honest Significant Difference (HSD) post-hoc test for multiple comparisons using GraphPad Prism V.11.0.0.The ANOVA results revealed highly significant differences among all treatment groups ( p < 0.0001), with F-values substantially exceeding the corresponding critical F-value, indicating strong evidence against the null hypothesis Table (S 1,2).

The initial value of an index at age 40 (“ I n t e r c e p t 40−60 ”) is also a highly significant ( P < .0001) risk factor for mortality for HC and PP (i.e., higher values of respective index at age 40 correspond to higher risk of death compared to smaller values of this index), being nonsignificant for BG.

At PN50, the resulting blood Pb 2+ levels in these animals was 22.2±0.9 μg dl −1 ( n =47) for Pb 2+ exposed rats and 0.6±0.1 μg dl −1 ( n =64) for control rats, a difference that was highly significant ( P <0.0001).

This finding was highly significant ( p < 0.0001).

Both Manders’ tM1 ( Figure 4F ) and tM2 ( Figure 4G ) in the DHHC7 groups were markedly elevated above 0.5 relative to control, with all differences highly significant (P < 0.0001).

Furthermore, a highly significant publication bias was detected using the Linear regression plot ( t = 6.03, p < 0.0001) (Figure S 9 ).

Additionally, the model reached a highly significant correlation ( p < 0.0001), and the lack of fit of this model is insignificant ( p > 0.05).

Using the first 198 principal coordinates (accounting for 82.85% of the total variation), 223 individuals were successfully predicted by their ethnicities, yielding a cross-validated correct classification rate (CCR) of 71.02% as well as the highly significant canonical test statistics ( P =0.0001).

The reduced interaction model was fitted with a weighted least squares and was highly significant ( F (6,54) = 10.18; p < 0.0001).

However, there is a highly significant correlation between the average length of isotigs and percent BLAST hits (e.g. hits against ara , P < 0 . 0001, Table 4 ), and also between the total sequence length of each isotig group with the proportion of BLAST hits (e.g. hits against ara , P = 0 . 003).

Of the 10 hits identified after the two-step drug screen, 2 drugs caused a highly significant ( p < 0.0001) reduction in the number of serotonergic neurons ( Table 1 ): SirReal2 ( Figure 1 a,b and Supplementary File S2 ) and reserpine ( Supplementary File S2 ).

One‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA) analysis demonstrated that substrates had a highly significant effect on regimens 1, 2, 3, and 4 ( p = .0001).

However, a strong and highly significant inverse correlation between percentage of Tregs and Tmax emerged (p<0.0001, r = −0.56) ( Figure 3a ).

The change in localization between unbudded and small-budded cells was highly significant (using a two-tailed t test, p < 0.0001 for INO1 ; p = 0.0047 for GAL1 ), as was the change between small- and large-budded cells (p = 0.003 for INO1 ; p = 0.005 for GAL1 ).

On average, only 4.9 ± 0.7% of proliferating normal epithelial cells in TDLUs simultaneously expressed ER-α, compared with 27.6 ± 2.2% in HELUs, which was also a highly significant difference ( P < 0.0001).