ERR572006

ENA first seen 2014

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

44/100 · F

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

Data type / assay

WGS

Organism

Lilium pyrenaicum

Instrument

454 GS FLX Titanium

Platform

LS454

Files available

FASTQ (raw reads), submitted files

N numbers (samples, groups)

1 runs

Metrics (value · how obtained)

checksum ok yes reported

total bases 31581957 reported

total reads 106519 reported

n content pct 0.024 measured

pct q20 bases 81.9 measured

pct q30 bases 54.6 measured

gc content pct 36.3 measured

mean read length 296.5 measured

mean base quality 29 measured

adapter content pct 0 measured

duplication rate pct 12.23 measured

How this grade was computed

Weighted mean of 3 scored metric(s) → 44/100

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 54.6 measured ×1 0%

duplication rate pct 12.23 measured ×0.5 87%

adapter content pct 0 measured ×0.4 100%

QC cost 6 s compute

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