Front. Nutr. Frontiers in Nutrition Front. Nutr. 2296-861X Frontiers Media S.A. 10.3389/fnut.2022.1094120 Nutrition Erratum Erratum: Sex-specific effects of maternal dietary carbohydrate quality on fetal development and offspring metabolic phenotype in mice Frontiers Production Office * Frontiers Media SA, Lausanne, Switzerland

Approved by: Frontiers Editorial Office, Frontiers Media SA, Switzerland

 *Correspondence: Frontiers Production Office production.office@frontiersin.org

This article was submitted to Nutrition and Metabolism, a section of the journal Frontiers in Nutrition

 29 11 2022 2022 9 1094120 09 11 2022 09 11 2022 Copyright © 2022 Frontiers Production Office. 2022 Frontiers Production Office

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

 An Erratum on Sex-specific effects of maternal dietary carbohydrate quality on fetal development and offspring metabolic phenotype in mice by Campbell, G. J., Lucic Fisher, S. G., Brandon, A. E., Senior, A. M., and Bell-Anderson, K. S. (2022). Front. Nutr. 9:917880. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2022.917880 maternal diet glycemic index carbohydrate quality metabolism mice

Due to a production error, there was a mistake in Figure 1 as published. The line thickness in Figure 1A was too thick. The corrected Figure 1 appears below.

Dam body weight (A) in Part 1 and (B) in Part 2: (i) pre-pregnancy, (ii) at conception, (iii) gained during pregnancy, (iv) during pregnancy. n = 8–10 per diet. Line graphs depict data as mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05 vs. chow; ***p < 0.001 vs. chow; ##p < 0.01 vs. glucose; $p < 0.05 sucrose vs. chow; ¤p < 0.05 isomaltulose vs. chow; § p < 0.05 sucrose vs. isomaltulose; ·p < 0.05 glucose vs. chow; ···p < 0.001 glucose vs. chow; ¶ p < 0.05 glucose vs. fructose; ¶¶ p < 0.01 glucose vs. fructose.

The publisher apologizes for this mistake. The original article has been updated.