ERR3662300

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

67/100 · D

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

What this means

claude:haiku

Exome-targeted sequencing from pitcher plant (*Nepenthes platychila*) using MiSeq with good quality (85.3% Q30) and minimal sequencing artifacts (0.001% N-content); suitable for variant discovery in plant coding regions.

Data type / assay

WES

Organism

Nepenthes platychila

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 384240948 reported

total reads 638274 reported

n content pct 0.001 measured

pct q20 bases 93 measured

pct q30 bases 85.3 measured

gc content pct 43.7 measured

mean read length 301 measured

mean base quality 34.4 measured

adapter content pct 34.57 measured

duplication rate pct 7.98 measured

How this grade was computed

Weighted mean of 3 scored metric(s) → 67/100

The D 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.

pct q30 bases 85.3 measured ×1 77%

duplication rate pct 7.98 measured ×0.5 100%

adapter content pct 34.57 measured ×0.4 0%

QC cost 5 s compute

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