## 3 Results
### Effect on Prolificacy  
After acute parental exposure (72 h), a slight but non-significant variation in the number of emerged adults was observed in the standardized medium (F\({}_{1}\)-N; Figure 6A). In \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline  & & & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Statistics**} \\ \cline{3-6}  & & & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Fisher’s Exact Test**} \\ \cline{3-6}  & **Condition** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Maximal** \\ **Longevity at** \\ **25\%** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Maximal** \\ **Longevity at** \\ **50\%** \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Maximal** \\ **Longevity at** \\ **75\%** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Maximal** \\ **Longevity at** \\ **90\%** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{F1-N vs. F1-T} & 1 mM F\({}_{1}\)-N vs. 1 mM F\({}_{1}\)-T & ns & ns & ns & ns \\ \cline{2-6}  & 2 mM F\({}_{1}\)-N vs. 2 mM F\({}_{1}\)-T & * & ns & ns & ns \\ \cline{2-6}  & 5 mM F\({}_{1}\)-N vs. 5 mM F\({}_{1}\)-T & * & * & *** & ns \\ \cline{2-6}  & 10 mM F\({}_{1}\)-N vs. 10 mM F\({}_{1}\)-T & *** & ns & ** & ns \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{F\({}_{2}\)-TN vs. F\({}_{2}\)-TT} & Control F\({}_{2}\)-TN vs. Control F\({}_{2}\)-TT & ns & ns & ns & ns \\ \cline{2-6}  & 0.5 mM F\({}_{2}\)-TN vs. 0.5 mM F\({}_{2}\)-TT & ns & *** & ns & ns \\ \cline{2-6}  & 1 mM F\({}_{2}\)-TN vs. 1 mM F\({}_{2}\)-TT & ns & * & * & ns \\ \cline{2-6}  & 2 mM F\({}_{2}\)-TN vs. 2 mM F\({}_{2}\)-TT & ns & ns & ns & ns \\ \cline{2-6}  & 5 mM F\({}_{2}\)-TN vs. 5 mM F\({}_{2}\)-TT & ns & ns & ns & ns \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{F1-T vs. F2-TT} & Control F\({}_{1}\)-T vs. Control F\({}_{2}\)-TT & ns & ns & ns & ns \\ \cline{2-6}  & 0.5 mM F\({}_{1}\)-T vs. 0.5 mM F\({}_{2}\)-TT & ns & ns & ns & ns \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-6}  & 1 mM F\({}_{1}\)-T vs. 1 mM F\({}_{2}\)-TT & ns & * & * & ns \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-6}  & 2 mM F\({}_{1}\)-T vs. 2 mM F\({}_{2}\)-TT & ns & ns & ns & ns \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-6}  & 5 mM F\({}_{1}\)-T vs. 5 mM F\({}_{2}\)-TT & ns & *** & ** & ns \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: _Cont._the treated medium (F\({}_{1}\)-T), where the individuals remained exposed to BPA throughout larval development, a significant decrease was observed at 2 and 5 mM. At 10 mM, a slight increase in prolificacy was observed; however, the number of emerged adults was still significantly different from the control (Figure 6B). This suggests that acute treatment of the progenitors, by itself, does not have a great influence on prolificacy, whereas chronic treatment during larval development can significantly, and not monotonically, affect the number of emerged adults. The results obtained in the two media were also compared (Figure 6C). A significant difference was observed between the number of emerged adults in both controls, as well as at 1 and 5 mM. This variation in the controls may have been due to a difference in medium humidity or contamination of the standard medium, since they were performed simultaneously. Figure 6: The results of the prolificacy assay. (**A**) The mean prolificacy obtained in F\({}_{1}\)-N after acute parental exposure. (**B**) The mean prolificacy obtained in F\({}_{1}\)-T after chronic exposure throughout larval development and acute parental exposure. (**C**) Comparison between the mean prolificacy obtained in F\({}_{1}\)-N and F\({}_{1}\)-T. (**D**) The mean prolificacy obtained in F\({}_{2}\)-TN after chronic parental exposure. (**E**) The mean prolificacy obtained in F\({}_{2}\)-TT after chronic exposure throughout larval development and acute parental exposure. (**F**) Comparison between the mean prolificacy obtained in F\({}_{2}\)-TN and F\({}_{2}\)-TT. Statistical significance was obtained using the \(\chi^{2}\) test, with the significance level set at 0.05. The results are plotted as mean + SEM when compared to the control (n = 20 flies/treatment). Legend: *—_p_ < 0.05; **—_p_ < 0.01; ***—_p_ < 0.005. In the F\({}_{2}\) generation, greater variation in both media was observed.