Corpus 1,272 assessed · 1,173 scored · 643 reproduced ≥75 · 168 flagged ·∅ 74.1/100
← Dataset search

ERP122203

ENA

Provenance — who produced it, who reused it

Linked to 0 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.

No linked papers found in the corpus yet.

Deep data QC

100/100 · A

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

What this means
claude:haiku

Soft coral (Pinnigorgia flava) RNA-seq on MiniSeq with 633 million 50 bp reads at 97.6% Q20 and 95.3% Q30 across 63.3 Gb supports comprehensive transcriptome analysis. The 43.7% GC reflects cnidarian composition; high throughput enables characterization of coral reproduction, disease response, and environmental adaptations.

Data type / assay
bulk-RNA-seq
Organism
Pinnigorgia flava
Instrument
Illumina MiniSeq
Platform
ILLUMINA
N numbers (samples, groups)
29 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 63300907900 reported
total reads 633009079 reported
n content pct 0.006 measured
pct q20 bases 97.6 measured
pct q30 bases 95.3 measured
gc content pct 43.7 measured
mean read length 50 measured
mean base quality 36.5 measured
adapter content pct 0.16 measured
duplication rate pct 3.51 measured
How this grade was computed
Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 100/100

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

pct q30 bases 95.3 measured ×1 100%
mean base quality 36.5 measured ×0.6 100%
adapter content pct 0.16 measured ×0.4 100%
duplication rate pct 3.51 measured ×0.4 100%
QC cost 12 s compute

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

Scientific quality

Based on hands-on reproduction of the papers that use this dataset. A reproducible paper that stands on this data is positive evidence; a flagged one is a prompt to look closer — never a verdict on the dataset itself without the evidence.

1 studies use it mean score 50