Showing 1 - 20 results of 49 for search '(( significant decrease decrease ) OR ( significantly weaker decrease ))~', query time: 0.36s Refine Results
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7

    Qualitative changes in the implant subgroup. by Adela Klezlova (22608008)

    Published 2025
    “…In the study group, the IOP was statistically significantly lower by 29% at the end of the follow-up compared to the preoperative measurements (<i><i>p</i></i> = 0.009). …”
  8. 8

    Results of the colorimetric MTT test. by Adela Klezlova (22608008)

    Published 2025
    “…In the study group, the IOP was statistically significantly lower by 29% at the end of the follow-up compared to the preoperative measurements (<i><i>p</i></i> = 0.009). …”
  9. 9

    IOP fluctuation. by Adela Klezlova (22608008)

    Published 2025
    “…In the study group, the IOP was statistically significantly lower by 29% at the end of the follow-up compared to the preoperative measurements (<i><i>p</i></i> = 0.009). …”
  10. 10

    IOP fluctuation. by Adela Klezlova (22608008)

    Published 2025
    “…In the study group, the IOP was statistically significantly lower by 29% at the end of the follow-up compared to the preoperative measurements (<i><i>p</i></i> = 0.009). …”
  11. 11

    Granite sample. by Run-Zhi Jia (21262716)

    Published 2025
    “…Notably, the impact of confining pressure on fthe elastic deformation energy of the rock mass was more significant than on dissipative deformation energy.</p></div>…”
  12. 12

    X-ray diffractometer and mineral composition. by Run-Zhi Jia (21262716)

    Published 2025
    “…Notably, the impact of confining pressure on fthe elastic deformation energy of the rock mass was more significant than on dissipative deformation energy.</p></div>…”
  13. 13

    Continuous-discontinuous coupling model. by Run-Zhi Jia (21262716)

    Published 2025
    “…Notably, the impact of confining pressure on fthe elastic deformation energy of the rock mass was more significant than on dissipative deformation energy.</p></div>…”
  14. 14

    FLAC-PFC coupling calculation principle. by Run-Zhi Jia (21262716)

    Published 2025
    “…Notably, the impact of confining pressure on fthe elastic deformation energy of the rock mass was more significant than on dissipative deformation energy.</p></div>…”
  15. 15

    Energy evolution characteristics of granite. by Run-Zhi Jia (21262716)

    Published 2025
    “…Notably, the impact of confining pressure on fthe elastic deformation energy of the rock mass was more significant than on dissipative deformation energy.</p></div>…”
  16. 16

    Granite bond failure characteristic map. by Run-Zhi Jia (21262716)

    Published 2025
    “…Notably, the impact of confining pressure on fthe elastic deformation energy of the rock mass was more significant than on dissipative deformation energy.</p></div>…”
  17. 17

    Drawing test data. by Run-Zhi Jia (21262716)

    Published 2025
    “…Notably, the impact of confining pressure on fthe elastic deformation energy of the rock mass was more significant than on dissipative deformation energy.</p></div>…”
  18. 18

    Basic parameters of model. by Run-Zhi Jia (21262716)

    Published 2025
    “…Notably, the impact of confining pressure on fthe elastic deformation energy of the rock mass was more significant than on dissipative deformation energy.</p></div>…”
  19. 19

    Minimum data set used in the article. by Shizhen Xu (4474321)

    Published 2025
    “…The average total phosphorus (TP) content in cropland soil was slightly higher than in forestland and significantly higher than in grassland. The weaker carbon-sequestration capacity of cropland soil resulted in notably lower C:N (10.13) and C:P (47.38) ratios compared to forestland and grassland. …”
  20. 20

    Concentrations of C, N, and P in time change. by Shizhen Xu (4474321)

    Published 2025
    “…The average total phosphorus (TP) content in cropland soil was slightly higher than in forestland and significantly higher than in grassland. The weaker carbon-sequestration capacity of cropland soil resulted in notably lower C:N (10.13) and C:P (47.38) ratios compared to forestland and grassland. …”