After several months of personal journey towards accepting that the coronavirus pandemic is real (see Jandrić 2020a, b), in early March, it dawned on me that the pandemic does not need only so-called essential workers. Self-quarantined after returning from abroad weeks before the Croatian government locked down the country, I immediately wrote an editorial for Postdigital Science and Education and argued that 'While doctors, nurses, politicians, food suppliers, and many other brave people self-sacrifice to support our daily survival, this editorial argues that academics have a unique opportunity, and a moral duty, to immediately start conducting in-depth studies of current events.' (Jandrić 2020c: 234) I had no idea how to even approach these studies, yet I had a strong feeling that something needed to be done urgently. So, I just did what I know best and issued calls for 3 different types of Covid-19-related material to be published in Postdigital Science and Education: short testimonies, longer commentary articles, and full-length original articles. I had no idea how much material I would receive, what this material would look like, and what I would do with this material. I just had a deep gut feeling that we are witnessing a unique time in human history, a once-in-a-lifetime event, that needs to be recorded as it unfolds. For better or for worse, I decided to follow that feeling. This general vision, without a clear idea of what I was doing, paved a bumpy road for the development of this collection. On 17 March 2020, I shared the Call for Testimonies on Postdigital Science and Education social network sites and I emailed it to the journal's mailing list. Based on my previous experience with similar calls, I expected to receive 10 to 15 contributions and produce a standard-length collective article aiming at postdigital dialogue (Jandrić et al. 2019) about the pandemic. Yet my call went 'viral', at least for academic standards, and a couple of weeks later, I had more than 50,000 words written by more than 80 authors. So how do I make sense of all that material? My dear friend and Associate Editor of Postdigital Science and Education, Sarah Hayes, came to my rescue. We first tried to make sense of the contributions using critical discourse

Synthesis of eukaryotic ribosomes involves the assembly and maturation of precursor particles (pre-ribosomal particles) containing ribosomal RNA (rRNA) precursors, ribosomal proteins (RPs) and a plethora of assembly factors (AFs). Formation of the earliest precursors of the 60S ribosomal subunit (pre-60S r-particle) is among the least understood stages of ribosome biogenesis. It involves the Npa1 complex, a protein module suggested to play a key role in the early structuring of the pre-rRNA. Npa1 displays genetic interactions with the DExD-box protein Dbp7 and interacts physically with the snR190 box C/D snoRNA. We show here that snR190 functions as a snoRNA chaperone, which likely cooperates with the Npa1 complex to initiate compaction of the pre-rRNA in early pre-60S r-particles. We further show that Dbp7 regulates the dynamic base-pairing between snR190 and the pre-rRNA within the earliest pre-60S r-particles, thereby participating in structuring the peptidyl transferase center (PTC) of the large ribosomal subunit.

No abstract