“marginally non-significant”

Correlations ranged from 19% for male desiccation lt 50 (marginally non-significant) to 54% for female lt 100 (highly significant: P <0.0001).

The eigenvalues showed that LD1 was highly significant (F 75,28 = 5.62; P<0.0001), while LD2 was marginally non-significant (F 48,20 = 1.88; P = 0.062) and LD3 was not significant (F 23,11 = 1.37; p = 0.3).

Nonetheless, theta SPD from central site had a marginally non-significant interaction effect [F(1, 45) = 4.03; η2 = 0.08], pointing to an actual higher SPD in EC compared to EO only in the FM patients not in use of opioids (p < 0.001).

In multi-model inference, the best model of NMDS1 contained both PC1 ( Figure 7 ) and PC2, and was negatively associated with both (although PC2 was marginally non-significant), explaining 94.65% of the variance in NMDS1 ( b (PC1) = 0.294, t 12 = −14.40, p < 0.001; b (PC2) = 0.0783, t 12 = −2.16, p = 0.051).

juveniles, while differences between juveniles and adults were marginally non-significant (Tukey test; p < 0.001, p = 0.005 and p = 0.068 respectively).

Bombus occidentalis ( p = 0.059) showed a marginally non-significant increase while Dialictus 003 ( p = 0.003), Heriades 002 ( p < 0.001), Agapostemon texanus ( p = 0.029), and Lithurgus apicalis ( p = 0.015) all showed significant increases in body darkness as elevation increased.

The interaction was previously significant or marginally non-significant in models 3 ( P = 0.004), 5t ( P = 0.07), and 5i ( P = 0.06).

In the other two conditions, we either fail to find evidence for a statistical difference across the two orders (shape-color: χ 2 = 1.96, p = 0.376) or the difference is marginally non-significant (size-nationality: χ 2 = 10.8, p = 0.004).

A 2.12, P = 0.05) and females (Odds ratio additive C model 1.67, P = 0.03), and the pooled result was marginally non-significant (Odds ratio additive C model 1.79, P = 0.0045) ( Table 3 ).

The results of the performed regression analyses display the existence of a statistically significant, and a marginally non-significant association of the reported SEF prevalence with dominance ( p = 0.005), and type of data ( p = 0.060), respectively (Table 3 ).

(b) Trait-by-trait divergence The first and last samples of lineage II were significantly different for 12 of 16 traits at the p < 0.003 level; a 13th trait was marginally non-significant with p = 0.005 ( figure 2 and table 1 ).

In the reviewed version we removed results for LTAa 322 (marginally non-significant, p=0.0052) which prompted us to reformat the table.

First, the association between variation in hissing behaviour and exon 13 SNP66 genotype was significant before, and marginally non-significant after, controlling for FRD in the overdominant effect model (0.28 ± 0.10; P = 0.007; P.adjust = 0.054), where SNP66 genotype explained 1.3% of the total variance in hissing behaviour (R 2 m = 0.013).

Univariate statistical methods also showed a decreasing trend, though this was marginally non-significant ( p = 0.0076).

ADIPOQ SNP rs12495941 was significantly associated after adjusting for age, PEA, biological risk factors and behavioral risk factors, but the association attenuated and became marginally non-significant after adjusting for SES (model 6: ß (SE) = 0.40 (0.15), p =0.0086).

Physical activity status demonstrated marginally non-significant interaction (P-interaction = 0.089), with physically inactive individuals exhibiting significant elevated risk (OR = 1.51, 95% CI: 1.11–2.06, P = 0.009; 4.8% prevalence) versus no association among active participants (OR = 1.19, 95% CI: 0.93–1.53, P = 0.167; 3.1% prevalence), highlighting lifestyle modification as potential risk mitigation strategy.

After Bonferroni correction, there was a marginally non-significant group difference in visual-motor integration (BEERY VMI; t (21) = 2.86, p = 0.009, d = 0.97).

The exception to this was a marginally non-significant (at our critical level of p < 0.01) negative correlation between maternal effects on gonopodium size and female development time (correlation = −0.437 ± 0.165 s.e., p = 0.016), suggesting that mothers with faster developing daughters had sons with larger gonopodia.

There were marginally non-significant differences on the FDI [13 ( 7 ) vs. 22 ( 10 ), P = 0.01], the WMFI [8 ( 7 ) vs. 15 ( 9 ), P = 0.03], and the BDI [10 ( 6 ) vs. 16 ( 7 ); P = 0.03].

X-linked d N / d S is greater though marginally non-significant for X-linked genes (86 genes, permutation test with 1,000 replicates, P =0.067) relative to the autosomes (4,755 genes), due to a marginally significant increase in d N (permutation test with 1000 replicates, P =0.014) ( Supplementary Table 6 , Supplementary Fig. 5 ).

Participants in the Running and the Combined groups showed a large increase in their VO2-max levels, compared to those in the Control and NFB groups (shown in Figure 2 ), as revealed by post-hoc independent samples t -tests thresholded at a Bonferroni-corrected alpha level of 0.0125 (0.05/4); specifically, there were significant differences between the Running and Control groups [ t (36) = 4.548, p < 0.001, dz = 0.738], Combined and Control groups [ t (32) = 3.401, p = 0.002, dz = 0.567], Running and NFB groups [ t (38) = 3.088, p = 0.004, dz = 0.690], and a marginally non-significant difference between the Combined and NFB groups [ t (34) = 2.574, p = 0.015, dz = 0.429].

Following these corrections, BE4PTA became marginally non-significant in the AST model (adjusted p < 0.015, obtained p = 0.019), and NART-R became marginally non-significant in the SWMTE model (adjusted p < 0.015, obtained p = 0.018); further, sex became non-significant in the DMS model (adjusted p < 0.015, obtained p = 0.049), NART-R became non-significant in the PAL model (adjusted p < 0.010, obtained p = 0.039), and BE2PTA became non-significant in the SWM strategy model (adjusted p < 0.020, obtained p = 0.045).

Over the whole curve, the FFA level was lower with the LF diet than with the LGI (p<0.0001) and VLC (p<0.0001) diets, and lower by a marginally non-significant amount with the LGI versus the VLC diet (p = 0.018).

A fixed-effects model was used for the meta-analysis due to no observed heterogeneity (I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.433).The results showed that a one standard deviation (SD) increase in SII was marginally non-significant in relation to diabetic retinopathy (OR = 1.001; 95% CI: 1.000-1.003; P = 0.026).

Of these, 3 loci were significant or marginally non-significant prior to a Benjamini-Hochberg False Discovery Rate (FDR) correction ( Mannose phosphate isomerase ( MPI ), p = 0.03; Scavenger 3 , p = 0.04; and Toll 1 , p = 0.05).