“marginally significant”

1 C), a marginally significant difference between low trust and middle trust groups ( k = 0.1424, P = 0.0783), but not between middle trust and high trust groups ( k = 0.09, P = 0.5084).

There was marginally significant variation in seasonal data for male and female hunter flies in 2021 (F 9,34 = 1.95, p = 0.0783; F 9,34 = 1.98, p = 0.0734, respectively; Figure 3 B).

There was also a marginally significant sex*genotype interaction [F(1,69)=33.19, P=0.0784] with the highest expression levels in APOE4 -positive females for the HIP (Extended data Figure 3).

The frequency of Bifidobacterium increased at 2.1 MPa and decreased after decompression. We noted marginally significant changes in the frequencies of Clostridium cluster IV and cluster XVIII (p=0.0784 and 0.0757, respectively).

Fraction, on the other hand, had a significant effect on germination time ( χ 2 2,216.1 = 13.93, P = 0.0009) and a marginally significant effect on germination rate ( χ 2 2,216.1 = 5.09, P = 0.0784).

Intra‐location variability was detected within the French populations (Custom contrast; genotypes A and B, p = 0.0041, genotypes A and D, p < 0.0001, Table S2 ), while a marginally significant difference was found among the US genotypes (Custom contrast, genotypes E and F, p = 0.0785, Table S2 ).

There was however, a marginally significant interacting effect of virus infection and aphid infestation (virus x aphid: F 1,22 = 3.403, p -value = 0.0786).

Compared to Wistar rats, WKY rats exhibited lower levels of 5-HT in the hippocampus (marginally significant, p= 0.0789) and colon, reduced mRNA expression of TPH1 and IDO1 in the colon, while increased mRNA expression of TPH1 in the ileum.

There was a marginally significant trend for a decreasing female bias over the six time periods in the control group (Two-tailed Fisher’s exact test: P = 0.079; Fig. 3B ), a pattern that has been noted for other parasitoids that reproduce via symbiont-mediated parthenogenesis ( 37 ).

S3 A ] and marginally significant in the mPFC [t (24) = 1.83, P = 0.079, 95% CI(−0.83,13.95), Cohen’s d = 0.37; SI Appendix , Fig.

The only exceptions were two effects that became marginally significant: the increase in negative emotional granularity from Wave 2 to Wave 3 ( B = 0.06, SE = 0.03, p = .079) and the prediction of depressive symptoms by this change ( B = −0.39, SE = 0.22, p = .078).

The overall genotype × laying stage interaction was marginally significant ( R 2 = 0.065, p = 0.079), indicating stage‐dependent trends in genotype‐related variation (Table 6 ).

Separate t tests on the four SRBAI items showed a marginally significant higher score of the 3-day group on the following item: “I pressed without thinking,” t (49) = 1.79, p = .079, and a significantly higher score on the following item: “I pressed without having to consciously remember to,” t (49) = 2.99, p = .004.

The regression between respiration rates and distance from the nearest shore was marginally significant: ln(Respiration) = −2.648 + 0.559[ln(Distance)], Adjusted R 2 = 0.046, p = 0.079 (Figure 2 B).

This analysis revealed a marginally significant interaction between target size and feedback factor, F (9, 189) = 1.8, p = 0.079, η 2 p = 0.077 (additionally to a significant main effect of target size, see above).

There was a marginally significant difference in WM between adolescents and adults ( p = .079).

Second, we expected this difference to be larger in male than female observers and therefore we compared the difference between threatening minus neutral male body expressions between male and female observers which yielded a marginally significant difference ( t (24) = 1.454, p = 0.079, one-tailed).

For the parietal P1, the main effect of emotion type was marginally significant, F (2, 34) = 3.00, p = 0.079, η 2 = 0.150.

This significant interaction appears to be attributable in part to the marginally significant difference between the morphs from VPA in the autumn ( p = 0.079; t-test).

The moderated mediation model results for Time 1 showed that the interaction between N170 amplitude and age on reading was marginally significant (β = –0.01, p = .079, 95 % CI [–0.03, 0.01]), with significant direct effects at ages 10.6 (b = 0.291, p = .005, 95 % CI [0.090, 0.492]) and 12.1 (b = 0.310, p = .040, 95 % CI [0.090, 0.492]) but not at 8.6 years ( p = .112).

There were no differences between the urban group and the rural group in estimates of female–good AC, but a marginally significant difference in estimates of male–bad AC, ⊿χ 2 (1) =3.08, p = .079, w =.015, indicating that the two groups’ participants had equivalent levels of positive associations with females activated and that urban women had slightly less negative associations with males activated than rural participants.

We also found a positive relation between paternal age and Absorption that was marginally significant for one set of twins (p = 0.079) and conventionally significant (p = 0.038) for the other set of twins in the third model, but not without the enrichment sample.

However, when the partial Mantel tests were conducted separately for mainland and island populations, there was no significant correlation among mainland population ( P = 0.27, r = 0.07), but there was marginally significant correlation among island populations ( P = 0.079, r = 0.49) ( Supplementary Figure S3 ).

As shown in Figures 5A , a paired t -test showed a marginally significant effect of posture condition on mean [HbO] for SWM ( t = 1.87, df = 16, p = 0.079; standing-SWM, 2.81 × 10 −4 ± 1.55 × 10 −4 mmol/L; sitting-SWM, 3.57 × 10 −4 ± 1.22 × 10 −4 mmol/L), but not NWM ( t = −0.081, df = 16, p = 0.94; standing-NWM, 2.03 × 10 −4 ± 1.07 × 10 −4 mmol/L; sitting-NWM, 1.94 × 10 −4 ± 6.68 × 10 −5 mmol/L).

The association between environmental attitudes and behavior was marginally significant, F (1, 138) = 3.13, p = 0.079, η p 2 = 0.022, meaning that there was a trend for participants with higher levels of environmental attitudes to select environment-friendly options when printing (Cohen’s d = 0.30).