“weakly significant”

Weakly significant (0.01 < P < 0.05) differences were observed for enrofloxacin-resistant bacteria on farms O1 and C2 as well as for cefquinome-resistant bacteria on farms O1 and C1.

The first time interval is a period of having a weakly significant (p-values <0.05 on most days) positive correlation between tweet sentiment and COVID-19 from March 2, 2020 to June 10, 2020 where as COVID-19 cases increase, tweet sentiment increases.

MABs transduced with MLV WT -EFS showed a comparable fold differentiation index compared to no vector control MABs that was only weakly significant ( Figures 7 A and 7C; Kruskall-Wallis with uncorrected Dunn’s test, ∗p < 0.05).

In this study, we observed a weakly significant (p<0.05) decrease in EF with conventional echocardiography in the patient group compared to the controls.

As correlations between the rosette area and compactness or isotropy were only weakly significant (0.01 < p value < 0.05), and the trends were only observed in plants exposed to heat stress for 3 h, the correlation between early changes in F q and rosette area size suggests that the maintenance of F q might be causal to plant performance at a later stage.

The differences for the 2‐μT‐saturation, aliphatic‐weighted MTR (MTR −3.6 ppm, 2 μT : 56.1 ± 3.8 vs 60.6 ± 1.1% at 3–5 days, 52.2 ± 4.1 vs 60.2 ± 0.7% at 7–9 days, and 55.0 ± 4.2 vs 59.8 ± 1.2% at 11–13 days), and amide and aliphatic AREX (AREX 3.6 ppm, 2 μT : 0.23 ± 0.04 vs 0.28 ± 0.04 s −1 at 3–5 days, 0.21 ± 0.03 vs 0.29 ± 0.02 s −1 at 7–9 days, and 0.21 ± 0.04 vs 0.30 ± 0.03 s −1 at 11–13 days and AREX −3.6 ppm, 2 μT : 0.20 ± 0.06 vs 0.27 ± 0.05 s −1 at 3–5 days, 0.16 ± 0.06 vs 0.27 ± 0.02 s −1 at 7–9 days, and 0.19 ± 0.06 vs 0.27 ± 0.04 s −1 at 11–13 days) images were weakly significant ( p < 0.05) at 3–5 days after implantation and strongly significant ( p < 0.001) at 7–9 and 11–13 days.

P -values were considered weakly significant if 0.1 ≥ P > 0.05 and statistically significant if P ≤ 0.05.

For the genes lacking a close neighbor ( supplementary table S6 d , Supplementary Material online), the trend is mixed but the overall χ 2 statistic is weakly significant ( χ 2 = 12.4, df = 5, P < 0.05).

Furthermore, scant chewing could be associated with autonomous nervous system dysfunction leading to impaired gastric motor function.[ 24 , 25 ] Breakfast consumption was negatively associated with IBS prevalence, but in the last model and after adjustment of all potential confounders, the relation became weakly significant ( P = 0.05).

IFNγ and IL-6 levels in culture/GeneXpert positive patients decreased between days 0 and 7 (overall both p<0.0001) and changes were weakly significant in culture/GeneXpert negative patients (p = 0.05 and 0.03, respectively).

The same correction is less evident with peak where there is only weakly significant ( P < .05) correction in the PM AC and Q.

Despite the heterogeneity in post vaccination response types (Table 1 ), T cell fold change and IgA fold change values were correlated, although the correlation itself was weakly significant (r = 0.32, p = 0.05, Fig. 3D ).

For late RGR, we found a weakly significant effect of drought history ( χ 2 1 =3.96, P =0.05).

The mutant exhibited a slightly higher rate constant that was weakly significant (P < 0.05 by confidence interval).

Growth media type × acetic acid was weakly significant ( p = 0.05–0.1), specifically with 38 mM [HAc] + [Ac – ] significantly ( p < 0.05) reducing both root and shoot length in peat, compared to the 0 mM controls, whereas in the potting mix 47 mM was required to significantly stunt even the root growth ( Figures 5A,C ).

• In GSEA, looks like the authors used both significant and weakly significant (p-value > 0.05) genes.

Regression analysis of the Bland–Altman differences between devices showed a weakly significant poor model fit for R5 ( R 2 = 0.06, p < 0.05) and for R20(19) ( R 2 = 0.07, p < 0.05).

DJF003 was another marker has weakly significant ( P = 0.05) associated with SCMV-BJ and SCMV-Seehausen, closest linked to the abovementioned hypothetical protein.

ANOSIM demonstrated that the catch data were not significantly different ( P > 0.05) between day and night in fishing zones 6, 7 and 8, but was weakly significant in fishing zone 2 ( P < 0.05; R = 0.266).

Compared with the non-smoking group, the combined (HNB and cigarette smokers) group showed lower Lac secretion rate (3.2 (1.0–9.3) μg/min), but the difference was weakly significant ( p < 0.05) ( Figure 2 b). 3.4.

There was no correlation for R2 population codes (Spearman’s rank, n = 29, ρ = .289, p = n.s.), but for retinal overlap there was a weakly significant correlation (Spearman’s rank, n = 29, ρ = −.371, p < .05).

In the A2/A3 genotypes, the damage was less consistent with only line 28 exhibiting a weakly significant ( p < 0.05) reduction at the lower temperature (Figure 5a ) and only two of the three genotypes showing a significant reduction at the higher temperature (Figure 5b ).

Statistical analysis showed that the predicted binding sites shared more targets in common than would be expected by chance for both mouse and human genomes, with the results weakly significant for mouse ( p < 0.05), but not significant for human ( p = 0.18).

Four weakly significant, positive correlations were found between the questionnaire data of lateral preferences and laterality tasks (Ear-VHF picture: r = .21, p = .05; Ear-VHF word: r = .26, p = .01; Eye-VHF word: r = .24, p = .02; DL-Eye: r = .22, p = .03) and three stronger correlations with the VHF face accuracies (Total EHI: r = -.29, p < .01; Hand: r = -.32, p < .01; Foot: r = -.31, p < .01).

There was no significant effect of sex, and the weakly significant (p < 0.05) effect for number of adjustment factors was associated with an erratic pattern, with lower RRs where the number of factors was 1, and higher RRs where it was 0 or 2+.