ERP000319

ENA first seen 2012

Provenance — who produced it, who reused it

Linked to 2 papers in the literature. Roles are inferred factual signals (who deposited the data vs who reused it), with counts — never a judgement about any author.

Reused by

2 further papers cite this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.

Deep data QC

51/100 · F

Standardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured

Data type / assay

WGS

Organism

Triticum aestivum

Instrument

454 GS FLX Titanium

Platform

LS454

Files available

FASTQ (raw reads), submitted files

N numbers (samples, groups)

209 runs

Metrics (value · how obtained)

checksum ok yes reported

total bases 128291588107 reported

total reads 215474658 reported

n content pct 0.036 measured

pct q20 bases 90.1 measured

pct q30 bases 74.8 measured

gc content pct 45.3 measured

mean read length 395.3 measured

mean base quality 33.7 measured

adapter content pct 0 measured

duplication rate pct 18.86 measured

How this grade was computed

Weighted mean of 3 scored metric(s) → 51/100

The F grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published WGS thresholds, weighted by its importance; nothing is hidden or subjective.

pct q30 bases 74.8 measured ×1 24%

duplication rate pct 18.86 measured ×0.5 66%

adapter content pct 0 measured ×0.4 100%

QC cost 19 s compute

measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0