ERR2804160

ENA first seen 2019

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

70/100 · C

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

What this means

claude:haiku

Lower-quality amplicon (C grade, 70/100) compromised by poor Q30 (82.8%, lowest in dataset, scored 64/100) and the highest adapter burden observed (3.57%, scored 82/100). Despite modest coverage (13.8x, extrapolated), duplication (90.23%) and contamination impair SNV accuracy. Consider re-sequencing.

Data type / assay

amplicon

Organism

Homo sapiens

Instrument

Illumina MiSeq

Platform

ILLUMINA

Read type

short-read

Files available

FASTQ (raw reads), submitted files

N numbers (samples, groups)

1 runs

Metrics (value · how obtained)

checksum ok yes reported

total bases 854712730 reported

total reads 1702615 reported

n content pct 0.005 measured

pct q20 bases 87.7 measured

pct q30 bases 82.8 measured

gc content pct 54.4 measured

mean read length 251 measured

mean base quality 33.9 measured

adapter content pct 3.57 measured

duplication rate pct 90.23 measured

mean target coverage 13.8 extrapolated

How this grade was computed

Weighted mean of 2 scored metric(s) → 70/100

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

pct q30 bases 82.8 measured ×1 64%

adapter content pct 3.57 measured ×0.5 82%

QC cost 24 s compute

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