Endogenous galectins and effect of galectin hapten inhibitors on the differentiation of the chick mesonephros

TLDR: Results suggest that galectin–glycoprotein interactions in the basement membrane are important in the maintenance of the renal epithelial phenotype.

Abstract: Galectins are galactoside-binding lectins. In the mesonephros of the chick embryo, the 16-kDa galectin is abundant in the glomerular and tubular basement membranes where it colocalizes with fibronectin and laminin. To test whether galectin–glycoprotein interactions could play a role in mesonephric development, the effects of the galectin hapten inhibitors thidodigalactoside (TDG) and lactose on the differentiation of the cultured mesonephros were investigated. When compared to control saccharide-free or maltose-treated cultures, mesonephroi cultured in the presence of TDG and lactose exhibited defects in tissue organization. These included a distorted tubule shape, pseudostratification of the tubular epithelium, and detachment of glomerular podocytes from the basement membrane. The presence of molecular differentiation markers in the developing mesonephros was investigated. In vivo, expression of the epithelial-specific cell adhesion molecule E-cadherin is restricted to differentiated tubular epithelial cells, whereas the intermediate filament protein vimentin is present in mesonephrogenic mesenchyme and is undetectable in tubular epithelial cells. In mesonephroi cultured in the absence of sugars or in the presence of maltose, the expression pattern of these two marker molecules resembles that found in the mesonephros in vivo. In contrast, in the mesonephroi cultured in the presence of TDG and lactose, the epithelial tubular cells expressing E-cadherin also express vimentin. Re-expression of vimentin in the tubular epithelial cells could indicate a partial reversal to a mesenchymal phenotype. Results suggest that galectin–glycoprotein interactions in the basement membrane are important in the maintenance of the renal epithelial phenotype. Dev Dyn 1999;215:248–263. © 1999 Wiley-Liss, Inc.