Search alternatives:
significant 1 » significant 17 (Expand Search), significant _ (Expand Search), significant i (Expand Search)
main decrease » gain decreased (Expand Search), small decrease (Expand Search), point decrease (Expand Search)
mean decrease » a decrease (Expand Search)
1 based » _ based (Expand Search)
significant 1 » significant 17 (Expand Search), significant _ (Expand Search), significant i (Expand Search)
main decrease » gain decreased (Expand Search), small decrease (Expand Search), point decrease (Expand Search)
mean decrease » a decrease (Expand Search)
1 based » _ based (Expand Search)
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
Mean persistence (±SE) of GO and GO-GA NPs on <i>Callosobruchus maculatus.</i>
Published 2025Subjects: -
5
-
6
-
7
Significance analysis data.
Published 2025“…The results indicate that: (1) The manifestation of mining pressure in gangue backfill mining is influenced by factors such as mining height and backfill collapse ratio; (2) Under the support of coal gangue, the concentrated stress in the coal seam significantly decreases, forming an arched shape according to the mining stages; (3) The range of plastic failure in the coal seam remains relatively stable under gangue backfill mining, with the plastic zone of the roof plate exhibiting a strip-like distribution; (4) Both range analysis and variance analysis revealed that the sensitivity ranking is backfill collapse ratio > mining height > elastic modulus. …”
-
8
-
9
-
10
Mean values of participants’ heart rate.
Published 2023“…Additionally, a motivational decrease was observed for the high motivation group due to the interruption. …”
-
11
Mean values of participants’ heart rate.
Published 2023“…Additionally, a motivational decrease was observed for the high motivation group due to the interruption. …”
-
12
Main characteristics of included papers.
Published 2023“…Meta-analysis of studies based on fecal testing demonstrated a significant reduction of <i>S</i>. …”
-
13
-
14
-
15
-
16
The main effects of PRGDP and Gi on SWB.
Published 2024“…Key findings include: (1) In temporal relationships, a 46.70% increase in GDP per capita implies a 0.38 increase in subjective well-being, while a 0.09 increase in the Gini coefficient means a 1.47 decrease in subjective well-being. (2) In spatial relationships, for every 46.70% increase in GDP per capita, subjective well-being rises by 0.51; however, this relationship is buffered by unfair distribution, and GDP per capita no longer significantly affects subjective well-being when the Gini index exceeds 0.609. …”
-
17
-
18
-
19
-
20