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.
1 further paper cites this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
47/100 · FStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
MinION (Oxford Nanopore) long-read WGS of Klebsiella pneumoniae generated 11.3k reads averaging ~4 kb per read (46.6 Mb total, 52.2% GC) with very low accuracy (0.1–1.5% bases at Q20–Q30) typical of unpolished Nanopore data. The long reads excel at resolving repetitive regions and structural variants in bacterial genomes, but require consensus-building, polishing, or hybrid assembly with short reads for high-confidence SNP calling and medical microbiology applications.
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.
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0