There was a mistake in the caption of Figure 3 as published. (B) Representative pattern of a female rat from a mother exposed to dim light at night (DLAN, orange circles; n = 8).
The estrous cycle of the female offspring from mothers exposed to DLAN was not affected. (A) Representative graph of the estrous cycle of a female rat from a mother maintained in a regular light-dark cycle (LD, blue circles). (B) Representative pattern of a female rat from a mother exposed to dim light at night (DLAN, orange circles). “L” refers to leukocytes, “N” to nucleated cells, and “C” to cornified cells. (C) Percentage of rats with regular and irregular estrous cycles in the LD and DLAN groups (n = 10).
Panel A shows a line graph with blue points depicting data under LD conditions across eight days, with values fluctuating between L, N, and C. Panel B presents a similar pattern using orange points for DLAN conditions. Panel C contains a bar chart comparing percent of rats with regular and irregular patterns under LD and DLAN. Regular patterns are more common in both groups, but DLAN has a higher proportion of irregularity at twenty percent compared to LD's ten percent.
The corrected caption of Figure 3 appears below.
(B) Representative pattern of a female rat from a mother exposed to dim light at night (DLAN, orange circles; n = 10).
In the Funding Statement, an incorrect number was provided for DGAPA-PAPIIT. The correct number is DGAPA-PAPIIT IN222524.
A correction has been made to the section [2 Material and methods, 2.5 Estrous cycle determination, Paragraph 1]:
Briefly, a vaginal wash was performed daily at ZT3 over a period of eight days from PN80 to PN88 (n = 10/group).
Regular cycles last from 4 to 5 days (1 proestrus day, 1 estrous day and 1 diestrus I day and 1-2 diestrus II days) and they must have the sequence mentioned before.
The original article has been updated.
Generative AI statement
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Edited and Reviewed byGeoffrey A. Head, Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Australia