ERR843907

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

52/100 · F

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

What this means

claude:haiku

miRNA-seq with insufficient quality for reliable small-RNA quantification. High duplication (69.05%) and low Q30 bases (78.4%) together compromise isoform detection and abundance estimation. Not recommended for reuse without re-sequencing or extensive validation of results.

Data type / assay

bulk-RNA-seq

Organism

Acyrthosiphon pisum

Instrument

Illumina HiSeq 2500

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 300000000 reported

total reads 6000000 reported

n content pct 0.012 measured

pct q20 bases 86.9 measured

pct q30 bases 78.4 measured

gc content pct 57.8 measured

mean read length 50 measured

mean base quality 31.8 measured

adapter content pct 0 measured

duplication rate pct 69.05 measured

How this grade was computed

Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 52/100

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

pct q30 bases 78.4 measured ×1 42%

mean base quality 31.8 measured ×0.6 63%

adapter content pct 0 measured ×0.4 100%

duplication rate pct 69.05 measured ×0.4 13%

QC cost 26 s compute

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