ERR171791

ENA first seen 2021

Provenance — who produced it, who reused it

Linked to 1 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

1 further paper cites this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.

Deep data QC

100/100 · A

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

Data type / assay

WES

Organism

Mus musculus

Instrument

Illumina HiSeq 2000

Platform

ILLUMINA

Read type

short-read

Files available

FASTQ (raw reads), BAM/CRAM (aligned)

N numbers (samples, groups)

1 runs

Metrics (value · how obtained)

checksum ok yes reported

total bases 9453897600 reported

total reads 63025984 reported

n content pct 0.011 measured

pct q20 bases 98.3 measured

pct q30 bases 93.9 measured

gc content pct 47.9 measured

mean read length 75 measured

mean base quality 35.8 measured

adapter content pct 0.01 measured

duplication rate pct 3.17 measured

mean target coverage 175.1 extrapolated

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 WES thresholds, weighted by its importance; nothing is hidden or subjective.

mean target coverage 175.1 extrapolated ×1.2 100%

pct q30 bases 93.9 measured ×1 100%

duplication rate pct 3.17 measured ×0.5 100%

adapter content pct 0.01 measured ×0.4 100%

QC cost 48 s compute

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