ライフサイエンスコーパス: false discovery rate

1 , difficulties replicating findings and high false discovery rates).

2 xercise duration 11.9+/-2.1 minutes) at a 5% false discovery rate.

3 easing width, while provably controlling the false discovery rate.

4 TARDIS achieved 96% sensitivity with only 4% false discovery rate.

5 n orthogonal validation method to reduce the false discovery rate.

6 in biological triplicate experiments at a 1% false discovery rate.

7 e using only search scores and a predictable false discovery rate.

8 osition pair for every 7 amino acids at a 1% false discovery rate.

9 rs 32% more associations than BH at the same false discovery rate.

10 ically is also limited by the levels set for false discovery rate.

11 s, with greater sensitivity and a much lower false discovery rate.

12 and adjusted for multiple comparisons using false discovery rate.

13 3,301 unique cross-links at approximately 1% false discovery rate.

14 ed cell supernatants were identified at a 1% false discovery rate.

15 ant changes in 164 metabolites (92.6%) at 5% false discovery rate.

16 ially abundant proteins with a corresponding false discovery rate.

17 tween conditions and controlling the spatial false discovery rate.

18 P values were corrected for false discovery rate.

19 lusions and the thresholding of the Bayesian false discovery rate.

20 d by using a sample permutation test and the false discovery rate.

21 ene associations while maintaining a nominal false discovery rate.

22 lipids using MS-DIAL 4 with a 1-2% estimated false discovery rate.

23 for multiple comparisons to control for the false discovery rate.

24 lues were additionally assessed by using the false discovery rate.

25 in univariate analyses after correction with false discovery rate.

26 iqueness ranging from 0.84 to 0.97, with low false-discovery rate.

27 dentified cis-eQTLs for 12,400 genes at a 1% false-discovery rate.

28 ment for multiple comparisons to control for false-discovery rate.

29 expression similarities while suffering high false discovery rates.

30 es led to more identifications at >10x lower false discovery rates.

31 , and permutation testing was used to assess false discovery rates.

32 are associated with low specificity and high false discovery rates.

33 oundaries, remove interferences, and control false discovery rates.

34 with maintaining nominal false positive and false discovery rates.

35 in significantly inflated false positive and false discovery rates.

36 arker of idiopathic cardiac arrest (P=0.002; false discovery rate, 0.007; classification accuracies >

37 llowing correction for multiple comparisons (false-discovery rate, 0.12).

38 ferences among microhabitats (mean FST=0.15; false discovery rate 1%).

39 significant single-nucleotide polymorphisms (false discovery rate, 15%) in 4 quantitative trait loci

40 y-seven differential acetylation peaks (FDR [false discovery rate], 5%) pointed to pathways altered i

41 complete a broad assessment of the empirical false discovery rate across other subject areas and char

42 on-inferiority was declared if the one-sided false discovery rate adjusted (FDRadj) p value was less

43 ted with delinquent behavior (beta = .205, p(false discovery rate adjusted) < 0.001), suggesting redu

44 ed with delinquent behavior (beta = -.123, p(false discovery rate adjusted) = .028) and global mean d

45 between groups and surviving adjustment for false discovery rate (adjusted P<0.1).

46 and -28.24 [-56.29 to 12.08], respectively; false discovery rate-adjusted P = .01 and .03, respectiv

47 , and 10.72 [-11.23 to 29.57], respectively; false discovery rate-adjusted P = .01, .04, and .05, res

48 ectively; interaction P unadjusted = .00238; false discovery rate-adjusted P = .0238).

49 itine; median change, 7.83 [-5.64 to 26.99]; false discovery rate-adjusted P = .03).

50 ed with randomized CEE and 52% with CEE+MPA (false discovery rate-adjusted P value<0.05) in multivari

51 um but higher Escherichia and Fusobacterium (false discovery rate-adjusted P values <0.05).

52 ifferentially methylated CpGs by atopy, with false discovery rate-adjusted p values ranging from 9.58

53 ant genetic correlations with brain volumes (false discovery rate-adjusted p=0.0035 for intracranial

54 en presentation, and immune system pathways (false-discovery rate-adjusted P < .05).

55 that use multiple hypothesis testing with a false discovery rate adjustment prioritize genes based o

56 , and 50 showed at least 1.5-fold variation (false discovery rate adjustment q value <0.05).

57 the NHS and 96 metabolites in the HPFS after false discovery rate adjustment.

58 our exploratory analysis were not robust to false-discovery-rate adjustment.

59 an existing approaches while controlling the false discovery rate among detected cells.

60 easured by a comprehensive index, and lowest false discovery rate among the three methods.

61 s from multiple phenotypes using conditional false discovery rate analysis provides increased power t

62 Using stringent false discovery rate analysis, MMP-10 and MET were signi

63 Genetic loci identified by conditional false discovery rate analysis.

64 novel ALS-associated loci using conditional false discovery rate analysis.

65 sting methods by obtaining better control of false discovery rate and comparable statistical power.

66 osed method exhibits improved control of the false discovery rate and improved power over existing me

67 of order statistics, our method controls the false discovery rate and improves the power of detecting

68 ith existing methods, our approach had a low false discovery rate and substantially improved the dete

69 al expression may have better control of the false discovery rate, and adapt well to new data types w

70 ple testing procedure to control the overall false discovery rate; and (iv) our approach defines the

71 Applying the conditional false discovery rate approach, we increased discovery of

72 The software introduces an MS2 false discovery rate approach, which is based on single

73 dditional associations through a conditional false discovery rate approach.

74 False discovery rate-based statistics identified a highe

75 roup means parameterization, controlling the false discovery rate below 0.05.

76 cirrhosis in phase 2 validation cohort, at a false discovery rate below 5%.

77 e number of associated disease genes at a 5% false discovery rate by an average of 2.1-fold compared

78 and quantified ~750-800 protein groups (<1% false-discovery rate) by analyzing just ~5 ng of protein

79 We note that false-discovery rates can be estimated at different poin

80 801E-07, 95% CI: 0.045, 0.097; adjusted mean false discovery rate cancer = 0.264 vs. general medicine

81 ly developed genetic pleiotropic conditional false discovery rate (cFDR) approach to discover novel l

82 P, a genetic-pleiotropy-informed conditional false discovery rate (cFDR) method was applied on two su

83 After correcting for false discovery rates, changes in the DNA methylation le

84 th maintenance of nominal false positive and false discovery rates compared the other available strat

85 in common genetic variants using conditional false discovery rate (condFDR) analysis.

86 rols) applying the conditional/conjunctional false discovery rate (condFDR/conjFDR) statistical frame

87 ompared by using a general linear model with false discovery rate control for multiple comparisons.

88 rformance in identifying correct biomarkers, false discovery rate control, and minimum estimation bia

89 on through data augmentation under preserved false discovery rate control.

90 s analysis, p values were significant at the false discovery rate corrected threshold of p=0.0156.

91 21 to .49, canonical r(test) = .10 to .39, p(false discovery rate corrected) < .0001).

92 Significant (false discovery rate corrected) and widespread cortical

93 sm (statistical parametric mapping analyses, false discovery rate corrected).

94 eric tracts and thalamic radiation (P < .05, false discovery rate corrected).

95 gle pathways were also identified (p < 0.05, false discovery rate corrected).

96 sivity of the left dentate gyrus (p = 0.002; false discovery rate corrected; adjusting for sex, age,

97 mprovement with EX/RP for patients with OCD (false discovery rate-corrected P < 0.05).

98 otypy, also in medial prefrontal cortex; all false discovery rate-corrected ps < .05), which are regi

99 False discovery rate-corrected voxel-based findings were

100 on of two-fold or greater and P < 0.05 after false discovery rate correction for the HEC-1-B cell lin

101 False discovery rate correction was used for multiple te

102 enomes, using updated statistical tests with false discovery rate corrections for multiple testing.

103 False discovery rate corrections were applied to all ver

104 n variability with statistically significant false discovery rates could be traced to specific immune

105 ied strong dependence (|r| > 0.95, empirical false discovery rate [eFDR] < 0.01) in transcript abunda

106 the benefits of open searching for improved false discovery rate estimation in proteomics.

107 can be computed efficiently enough to enable false discovery rate estimation via permutation.

108 significant covariances and also to control false discovery rates, even when the sample size is smal

109 de spectrum matching, with strict control of false discovery rates, facilitates identifying > 72% of

110 F antigens from healthy controls and LC at a False Discovery Rate (FDR) < 0.01.

111 hylated positions (DMPs) were evaluated at a false discovery rate (FDR) < 0.05 and differentially met

112 tified several significant pathways for BMD [false discovery rate (FDR) < 0.05], such as KEGG FOCAL A

113 ificantly different between diets at day 28 [false discovery rate (FDR) < 0.05].

114 s significantly enriched in CRC metagenomes (false discovery rate (FDR) < 1 x 10(-5)).

115 ng over 10,000 gene targets (eGenes), with a false discovery rate (FDR) < 5%.

116 the 23,060 significant cis-regulated genes (false discovery rate (FDR) </= 0.05), 2,743 (12%) showed

117 und that a total of 12 significant SNPs with false discovery rate (FDR) </=0.05 were mapped to one no

118 .5-5.0% reduction in intervention group, all false discovery rate (FDR) <5%], the majority mapping to

119 ed cytosine-phosphate-guanine (dmCpG) sites (false discovery rate (FDR) <= 0.05), respectively, in th

120 ficantly higher blood erythritol [P < 0.001, false discovery rate (FDR) = 0.0435], and the targeted a

121 Six CpGs were significantly associated [false discovery rate (FDR) [Formula: see text]] with pre

122 enjamini-Hochberg method for controlling the false discovery rate (FDR) [Formula: see text]].

123 nt, (ii) a Bonferroni adjustment and (iii) a false discovery rate (FDR) adjustment which is widely us

124 ating characteristic (ROC) curve to minimize false discovery rate (FDR) and calculate the best thresh

125 -wise approach by showing better controls of false discovery rate (FDR) and higher sensitivity.

126 d CpGs, effect size(s) (Delta(beta)), target false discovery rate (FDR) and the number of simulated d

127 = 417,508) using a conditional/conjunctional false discovery rate (FDR) approach to evaluate overlap

128 testing procedure, named Bon-EV, to control false discovery rate (FDR) based on Bonferroni's approac

129 False discovery rate (FDR) control has been widely used

130 it has been reported in literature that the false discovery rate (FDR) control of some popular metho

131 gress in multiple testing procedures such as false discovery rate (FDR) control, methods that take in

132 nfer the differential network structure with false discovery rate (FDR) control.

133 etition (TDC) is the most popular method for false discovery rate (FDR) control.

134 HIV-infected children (n = 54) had evidence (false discovery rate (FDR) corrected p < 0.05) of metabo

135 20 CpGs was associated with urinary As after false discovery rate (FDR) correction (FDR < 0.05).

136 d target-decoy based methods to estimate the false discovery rate (FDR) for 70 public metabolomics da

137 The false discovery rate (FDR) from the target-decoy databas

138 Statistical methods that control the false discovery rate (FDR) have emerged as popular and p

139 tantially more discoveries while controlling false discovery rate (FDR) in extensive experiments.

140 animal) models of human disease and the high false discovery rate (FDR) in preclinical science.

141 scherichia coli proteome with spectrum-level false discovery rate (FDR) less than 1%.

142 ets with an average sensitivity of 90% and a false discovery rate (FDR) of 3%, surpassing the perform

143 t a much larger number of putative loci at a false discovery rate (FDR) of 5% (refs.

144 Accurate estimation of false discovery rate (FDR) of spectral identification is

145 The false discovery rate (FDR) of the identification results

146 ssociations for the WD compared with the PD [false discovery rate (FDR) P < 0.05].

147 epresenting 1745 genes (2.0-fold or higher) (false discovery rate (FDR) p <= 0.05), multiple CpGs wer

148 = 269,867) using a conditional/conjunctional false discovery rate (FDR) statistical framework that in

149 ong the 6 genetic variants selected at a 20% false discovery rate (FDR) threshold, the minor allele o

150 of multiple correlated phenotypes using a 5% false discovery rate (FDR) threshold.

151 We used conjunction false discovery rate (FDR) to evaluate genetic pleiotrop

152 nce of the tools in terms of sensitivity and false discovery rate (FDR) using real data and simulated

153 blood at epigenome-wide significance level [false discovery rate (FDR)<0.05].

154 al abundance of each taxon, (c) controls the False Discovery Rate (FDR), (d) maintains adequate power

155 sociated SNPs by estimating stratum-specific false discovery rate (FDR), where strata are classified

156 idely used statistical method for estimating false discovery rate (FDR), which is a conventional sign

157 corrected for multiple comparisons using the false discovery rate (FDR), with FDR <0.05 deemed a sign

158 We report pySM, a framework for false discovery rate (FDR)-controlled metabolite annotat

159 At a false discovery rate (FDR)-corrected level of 0.05, we f

160 although the latter only controls the weaker false discovery rate (FDR).

161 ative enrichment score (RES) and conditional false discovery rate (FDR).

162 t SNPs with significant Bayes factor at a 5% false discovery rate (FDR).

163 s with multiple testing adjustment using the false discovery rate (FDR).

164 , and corrected for multiple comparisons via false discovery rate (FDR).

165 f individual OTU effects do not preserve the false discovery rate (FDR).

166 Statistical significance was based on the false discovery rate (FDR; <0.05) or a Bonferroni-correc

167 The Benjamini-Hochberg (BH) false discovery rates (FDR) approach was applied to cont

168 lacks statistical methods for estimating the false discovery rates (FDR) of these annotations.

169 tly associated with rs1801133 x tHcy levels [false-discovery rate (FDR) < 0.05].

170 significance did not persist after post hoc false-discovery rate (FDR) correction (FDR-corrected P v

171 hain fatty acid (SCFA) producer Lachnospira [false-discovery rate (FDR)-corrected P = 0.25] but decre

172 in controls, respectively (fold change >= 2; false discovery rate [FDR] < 0.05).

173 and in the expression of 3,857 transcripts (false discovery rate [FDR] <= 0.1 and absolute fold chan

174 groups improved on improvement index (>30%; false discovery rate [FDR] corrected p < 0.0008) and non

175 splayed DE between summer and winter births (False Discovery Rate [FDR] q < .05); among these, BHLHE4

176 ple testing following the Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate [FDR] showed that 18 miRNAs were si

177 in areas of alpha-s- and beta-casein (P<.01, false discovery rate [FDR]<.1).

178 rkers were bone sialoprotein (BSP, Discovery false discovery rate [FDR]-corrected p = 2.82 x 10-2, Re

179 ine dinucleotide regions for 82 transcripts (false discovery rate [FDR]-P < 0.05).

180 ng genes that were differentially expressed (false-discovery rate [FDR] < 0.01).

181 ficant following adjustment for confounders (false-discovery rate [FDR], < 0.10).

182 % reduction (~0.69 kg) in visceral fat mass (false discovery rate, FDR < 2.0 x 10(-16)), accompanied

183 ltiple hypothesis testing by controlling the false-discovery rate (FDRWilcoxon, FDRNoether) with a si

184 a method from Jager and Leek to estimate the false discovery rate for 94 journals over a 5-year perio

185 orm minimal solution of this system has zero false discovery rate for any level of noise, with probab

186 lse positive lesions with an increase in the false discovery rate from 45% for white-light endoscopy

187 vered 3218 cis- and 35 trans-eQTLs at </=10% false discovery rate in human placentas.

188 nd also maintains nominal false positive and false discovery rates in its posterior inference.

189 erential uncertainty, leading to an inflated false discovery rate, in particular at the transcript le

190 Swish has improved control of the false discovery rate, in particular for transcripts with

191 detected as differentially expressed at a 5% false discovery rate, including a few immune response ge

192 lex class I neoantigen peptides, the overall false discovery rate (incorrect neoantigens predicted) a

193 We find that the empirical false discovery rate is higher for cancer versus general

194 We also find that false discovery rate is negatively associated with log j

195 The false discovery rate, least absolute shrinkage and selec

196 ctional analysis identified 17 novel loci at false discovery rate less than 0.05 with overlap between

197 variate analyses adjusted for age and sex at false discovery rate less than 0.05.

198 al time with a P value less than 0.001 and a false discovery rate less than 5% were identified in 121

199 confirmed with high statistical confidence (false discovery rate < .10), including protein kinase C

200 on based on multi-SNP models was associated (false discovery rate < 0.01) with metabolite levels for

201 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with false discovery rate < 0.05 associated with response to

202 ignificant enrichments across nine diseases (false discovery rate < 0.05) (for example, NKX3-1 for pr

203 cohorts, 631 cases), we identified 179 CpGs (false discovery rate < 0.05) and 36 differentially methy

204 lly methylated (epigenome-wide significance, false discovery rate < 0.05) in relation to asthma devel

205 171 bacterial taxa that were significantly (false discovery rate < 0.05) more or less abundant, resp

206 ectrometry (MS3) detected >3000 significant (false discovery rate < 0.05) phosphorylation events on >

207 ased expression of 276 transcripts (FC > 2x, false discovery rate < 0.05), including IFNG, TNF, CSF2,

208 was associated with abundance of 13 genera (false discovery rate < 0.05), including Prevotella, Mits

209 We identified seven CpGs (false discovery rate < 0.05), of which three CpGs are lo

210 lly expressed in HDM APT (fold change >2 and false discovery rate < 0.05), with increased expression

211 ssociations with at least one tumor feature (false discovery rate < 0.05).

212 and 38 were newly identified (P < 5 x 10-8, false discovery rate < 0.05).

213 ferential DNA methylation of UNC5C and ENC1 (false discovery rate < 0.05).

214 n containing 3 (NRLP3) inflammasome members (false discovery rate < 0.05).

215 inflamed colon and TNF-alpha-treated cells (false discovery rate < 0.05).

216 atory biomarkers and inversely with 25(OH)D (false discovery rate < 0.05).

217 e found no statistically significant CpGs at false discovery rate < 0.05.

218 92-T/C and rs551238-A/C) were significantly (False Discovery Rate < 0.1) associated with mortality.

219 tations more frequently in males (based on a false discovery rate < 0.1), in comparison to zero of 18

220 erformed using DESeq2 (|fold change|>1.5 and false discovery rate < 0.3), in patients compared to con

221 EB1, GSDMB, GRAMD3 and ENSA; P < 5 x 10(-8); false discovery rate < 1%).

222 l of 80 genes were differentially expressed (false discovery rate < 10%), showing enrichment in cell

223 d seven CpG sites associated with mortality (false discovery rate < 20%) that replicated in the ECLIP

224 ied 63 differentially methylated CpGs (DMCs; false discovery rate < 5%) proximal to 81 genes (across

225 fy conserved sequences as short as 9 bp with false discovery rate </=0.05.

226 ites were associated with sodium intake at a false discovery rate </=0.10, only 4-ethylphenylsufate,

227 ted with hepatic fat in EA participants at a false discovery rate <0.05 (corresponding P = 6.9 x 10(-

228 We detected 32 DE genes (false discovery rate <0.05) in the exfoliome, but none i

229 1806 significantly differentially expressed (false discovery rate <0.05) transcripts in platelets fro

230 Strong evidence of association (false discovery rate <0.05) was found between PD and a p

231 rs were significant P<1x10(-7) (2623 CpGs at false discovery rate <0.05), indicating a pattern of per

232 s were found to be differentially expressed (false discovery rate <0.05), of which seven genes replic

233 17,974 differentially expressed genes (DEGs; false discovery rate <0.05; log-fold change cutoff = 0)

234 ographic traits in cross-sectional analyses (false discovery rate <0.10), and 8 of these proteins had

235 factors, and caloric intake controlled for (false discovery rate <0.2).Of 113 diet-related metabolit

236 ter correction for multiple comparisons by a false discovery rate <0.20.

237 ominal P < 0.05, but none was altered with a false discovery rate <0.25.

238 iated with expression of ribosomal proteins (false discovery rate <0.25; NES, 1.95).

239 genes involved in the extracellular matrix (false discovery rate <0.25; NES, 2.25).

240 cell cycle and DNA damage checkpoint genes (false discovery rate <0.25; normalized enrichment statis

241 n = 954 controls), 343 genes were found with false discovery rate <5% (standardized mean difference m

242 l, 4,901 genes with a fold change >1.5 and a false discovery rate <5% were detected in patients versu

243 ion, increased apoptosis, and significantly (false discovery rate <5%) altered the expression of 1,85

244 es than subjects who were desensitized only (false discovery rate <= 0.05 and fold change > 1.5).

245 tion CpGs potentially influenced by POE at a false discovery rate <= 0.05 of which 331 had not previo

246 rs at higher frequency among those with SLD (false discovery rate <= 1%), which expressed CD45RA, CCR

247 usters at higher abundance in the SLD group (false discovery rate <= 1%).

248 se who did not (log(2)fold change >=1.25 and false discovery rate <=5%).

249 sults showing positive associations obtained false discovery rates < 0.05.

250 At false discovery rates < 1%, our approach identified many

251 -trait-associated changes in expression at a false-discovery rate < 0.05.

252 es were corrected for multiple testing using false discovery rate (<0.05).

253 tistical significance (fold change>/=1.5 and false discovery rate</=0.05), to identify unique proteom

254 with incident CHD or myocardial infarction (false discovery rate<0.05).

255 -COL5A1, GLTPD2, SPTLC3, MBOAT7 and GALNT16 (false discovery rate<0.05).

256 ly expressed in vivo compared with in vitro (false discovery rate, </=0.001; 2-fold change) with 557

257 t interaction with RT on breast cancer risk (false discovery rate, <20%), of which 1 SNP in the PVT1

258 plicated in at least one replication cohort (false discovery rate, <25%).

259 sets from the Molecular Signatures Database (false discovery rate, <5%).

260 bacterial taxa were differentially abundant (false-discovery rate, <0.05) by asthma, atopy, or hay fe

261 ion methods, in terms of true positive rate, false discovery rate, mean squared error and effect size

262 The false discovery rate method controlled for multiple anal

263 Using the conjunction false discovery rate method, this study analyzed GWAS da

264 trols the false positives using the 2D local false discovery rate method.

265 h lean women, including 6 metabolites with a false discovery rate of <0.25.

266 W associated with allergic sensitization (at false discovery rate of 0.05), of which 33 were availabl

267 profile [62 differentially expressed genes (false discovery rate of 0.1 and log fold change >0.75)],

268 e variation, we identify 102 risk genes at a false discovery rate of 0.1 or less.

269 At a false discovery rate of 5%, we observed associations bet

270 ssociated with both birthweight and CMD at a false discovery rate of 5%.

271 ragmentation, we determined the experimental false discovery rate of identifications to be 2.21%.

272 ria of a fold change of greater than 2 and a false discovery rate of less than 0.05, 132 differential

273 ergy (P = 1.4e-17) encompassing 29 loci at a false discovery rate of less than 0.05.

274 hol-related cirrhosis in the validation at a false discovery rate of less than 20% were then directly

275 Furthermore, we showed a surprisingly low false discovery rate of our approach for discovery of ta

276 s used to identify significant associations (false discovery rate of Q < 0.05) between the number of

277 he curve of 0.64, p<0.0001), but with a high false-discovery rate of 72%.

278 fied cross-linked peptide pairs passing a 5% false discovery rate (on average approximately 21% more

279 atistically significant evidence of a higher false discovery rate, on average, for Open Access versus

280 0.320, 95% CI - 0.015, 0.046, adjusted mean false discovery rate Open Access = 0.241 vs. closed acce

281 not satisfactory, having either a very high false discovery rate or strong dependence on sequencing

282 djusted Rand index = 0.66; permutation-based false discovery rate p < .001).

283 Eight single-nucleotide polymorphisms (false discovery rate P < .05) were associated with both

284 Significant (false discovery rate p<0.01) methylation signals were co

285 transcripts and genes from 1599 genes (DEGs; false discovery rate P<0.05, fold change |2|, controllin

286 21 were significantly related to depression (false discovery rate q < .05).

287 (tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases 1); false discovery rate q < 0.05 for all).

288 hat were significantly associated with eGFR (false discovery rate Q value < 0.05) among HIV-positive

289 The False Discovery Rate (q < 0.05) was used to correct for

290 l were evaluated with the Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate (q) and logistic regression and the

291 Our method shows lower false discovery rates than existing methods on simulated

292 or vs 1.38 tumor hemisphere seeded; P = .03, false discovery rate threshold = 0.01).

293 ion and controlling for multiplicity using a false discovery rate threshold of 0.10.

294 with the majority (22/29) of genes passing a false discovery rate threshold of 0.3.

295 A false discovery rate threshold of 5% was used to determi

296 We used the false discovery rate to account for multiple testing.

297 ,000 abstracts enabling the study of how the false discovery rate varies by journal characteristics.

298 The false discovery rate was controlled at 1% (with continuo

299 were inferred using several methods, and the false discovery rate was controlled by the NestBoot fram

300 False discovery rate was used to adjust for multiple com